WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=d0cEq1PPhbU

NOTE
MEETING SECTIONS:

Part 1 (Video ID: d0cEq1PPhbU):
- 00:00:00: Meeting Introduction: Continuances, Consents, Public Comment Rules
- 00:02:32: General Public Comment: Logan Olri Discusses Pasco Development
- 00:06:29: Introduction of PC3 and PC4: Pulled from Consent Agenda
- 00:09:33: PC3 - RNR Property Investments Rezoning Presentation
- 00:12:42: PC3 Staff Questions: Conceptual Site Plan and Easements
- 00:14:35: PC3 Applicant Presentation: Building within One Acre Parcel
- 00:16:09: PC3: Public Comment - Tom Salado Opposes Rezoning
- 00:20:41: PC3: Public Comment - Danell Curl Opposes Rezoning
- 00:25:21: PC3: Public Comment - Transportation Consultant Michael Razer
- 00:31:13: PC3: Code Violations Discussed; LDC Right-of-Way Requirements
- 00:36:51: PC3: Discussion on Right-of-Way Width, Setbacks, Easements
- 00:47:15: PC3: Staff Recommendation Approval, Restrictions on Storage
- 00:50:05: PC3: Rezoning Approval Contingent Upon Further Considerations
- 00:52:24: PC4 Variance Request: FAM Residence Screen Enclosure
- 00:55:53: PC4: History of the Permit Application for the Enclosure
- 00:57:30: PC4: Doug Tilly Speaks in Support of the Screen Enclosure
- 01:00:39: PC4: Contractor Mark Weiss Elaborates on the Situation
- 01:01:46: PC4: Additional Comments and Vote for Approval
- 01:05:26: PC4: Discussion about Fee Refunds, Error Made By Building
- 01:07:21: PC4: Variance Approved, Application Fee To Be Waived
- 01:07:39: PC5: Mitchell 54 West MPUD Substantial Amendment Presentation
- 01:18:46: PC5: Questions from Planning Commission Members
- 01:19:02: PC5: Applicant Barbara Wilhight Provides Further Detail
- 01:29:55: PC5: Bridget Gillio - Concerned About Traffic, Environmental Issues
- 01:33:11: PC5: Wilhight Rebuttal, Details Landscape Enhancements, etc.
- 01:35:37: PC5: Approval, Binding Connectivity Plan Appreciated
- 01:36:01: PC5: Adjournment Taken for a 10 Minute Recess
- 01:56:03: PC6 Denton Avenue MPUD Rezoning Request: Staff Presentation
- 02:30:08: MPD Tracking Sheet: Checklist For Stakeholders and Permitting
- 02:30:42: Public Comment: Ken Howard on Road Safety Concerns
- 02:35:45: Public Comment: Martin Dolabach on Over-Accommodation
- 02:36:50: Public Comment: William Roberts on Rural Pasco
- 02:39:50: Public Comment: Janet Carile on Country Values and Wildlife
- 02:42:03: Public Comment: Karen Roberts on Increased Traffic
- 02:44:52: Public Comment: Sue Bolton on Flooding Concerns
- 02:47:18: Public Comment: Tracy Love on Incompatibility Concerns
- 02:50:43: Public Comment: Tim Vandenberg on Maintaining Rural Life
- 02:52:56: Public Comment: Nola on Protecting Pasco's Heaven
- 02:55:06: Public Comment: Matthew Kurthers on Generational Concerns
- 02:58:10: Public Comment: Skyler Tally on Changing Community
- 03:02:30: Public Comment: Lori Ali on Rural Lifestyle Changes
- 03:04:33: Public Comment: Anne Aerson on Suburban Surprise
- 03:06:46: Public Comment: Tim Low on Land Use Compatibility
- 03:10:11: Applicant Response: Addressing Public Questions and Concerns
- 03:11:04: Drainage and Grading Plans by Joseph Simino
- 03:18:32: Why Not 1-Acre Lots? Market Driven Home Design.
- 03:19:22: Drainage and Wildlife Issues by Joseph Simino
- 03:23:47: Lot Widths and Developer Perspectives with Robert Melson
- 03:27:13: Comprehensive Land Use, Flexibility, and Comp Plan Journey
- 03:27:44: Emergency Access, Bolton Road, and Fire Department Review
- 03:34:32: Mattis Road Emergency Access Options and Fire Review
- 03:41:11: Harmony Concerns, Discontent, and Comp Plan Direction
- 03:48:16: Pasco Code Implements the Comprehensive Plan Standards
- 03:51:37: Continuning Neighborhood Meeting, Compromise, and Compatibility
- 03:55:36: Meeting Adjourned and Unintelligible Conversation
- 04:09:16: Public Hearing Recapped With Comments From Participants
- 04:18:58: 2050 Comprehensive Plan Chapters Pasco Invest Chapter 11
- 04:25:22: Discussion on Impact Fees With No Service Standards
- 04:40:15: Pasco County Stormwater Management and Rule Questions
- 04:49:20: Storm Water and the County's Definition of Development
- 04:57:50: Inconsistency Discussion Regarding Concurrency Standards
- 04:58:26: Meeting Adjourned and More Chatter


Part: 1

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:17.520
Those are items where uh either the applicant or the staff has requested a continuence for any number of reasons and it's generally been our uh policy to uh allow for continuances where there are reasonably requested. We have

2
00:00:17.520 --> 00:00:34.079
consent items. Those items are items where we're going to hear them today, but they have not been uh questioned by any member of the staff or any member of the public. So, those items are on consent. Anything that is

3
00:00:34.079 --> 00:00:48.640
on consent, we'll read um the title to the item and if it's something that you want to pull or uh have heard today, uh just raise your hand and we'll pull it for discussion

4
00:00:48.640 --> 00:01:05.119
which will go to the regular items. And uh anything that's on the regular items will be fully vetted today and discussed by the applicant and anybody in the audience that has questions about it. Applicants will have uh five minutes to

5
00:01:05.119 --> 00:01:19.920
make their presentation. Uh and the questioners will have three minutes to ask ask questions and state their concerns followed by a return by the applicant to respond to any

6
00:01:19.920 --> 00:01:41.880
questions or concerns. Um has there been any request for additional time? There has not Mr. Chair >> actually there was Miss Kai requested additional time >> it was granted

7
00:01:42.400 --> 00:01:58.799
>> for Denton. >> Okay. I apologize Mr. Chair. Dentab did have additional time. >> Okay. All right. So if there has been additional time requested at least 20 hour 24 hours prior to this meeting for extra time um

8
00:01:58.799 --> 00:02:15.599
such extra time may be granted which we have granted one request for time for extra time. Um, as a personal note, please, uh, if you're here today, uh, please keep your phones in silent position so that they

9
00:02:15.599 --> 00:02:32.640
won't disturb anybody that may be talking or making the presentation. And before we start, is there anyone here that's here to speak on an item that is not on today's agenda? >> Mr. Chair, we do have one individual signed up for general public comment. It's Mr. Logan Olyri.

10
00:02:32.640 --> 00:02:51.599
>> Okay, Mr. Liry, would you come forward, please? To state your full name and your address. >> Mr. Chair, you >> Yes. Uh we'll we'll swear everybody now. So, anybody who in intends to give testimony today, just stand and raise

11
00:02:51.599 --> 00:03:13.680
your right hand and be sworn. >> You swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth. So, help God. Okay. >> All right. >> Hi everyone. My name is Logan Olri. I'm from 12309 Eagle Chase Way. And today I

12
00:03:13.680 --> 00:03:29.040
will be talking in a general sense about the development in Pasco County. I moved here 12 years ago and since then I've seen a rampant amount of development and

13
00:03:29.040 --> 00:03:47.040
excavation in my community. I actually got to witness it firsthand right in front of my house as it was being built. Back then I was young and I really had no idea what was going on and I didn't really question too much about it. But today I see the unfortunate

14
00:03:47.040 --> 00:04:06.560
circumstances that have unfolded in front of me. So recently I witnessed the development on Little Road. On my way here I saw them burning trees and disposing of every

15
00:04:06.560 --> 00:04:24.320
living thing that used to live there. I cannot personally condone such unsustainable practices and I'm speaking to all of you in hopes that maybe there can be change that comes about

16
00:04:24.320 --> 00:04:44.240
to make it so when we build and we take this habitat from these animals that maybe we do so in a way that isn't so invasive, isn't so destructive. As concerning the new developments on

17
00:04:44.240 --> 00:04:59.840
the agenda, I have to disagree with the new uh hotel and the new housing. I think that we have enough traffic here. I think that everyone >> You have to speak to the microphone.

18
00:04:59.840 --> 00:05:14.720
Thank you. >> I think that >> just have to get it on tape. >> Yes, sir. I think that everyone has seen our beautiful county turn into somewhat of a concrete jungle and that is not the

19
00:05:14.720 --> 00:05:29.120
place that I want to live and it's not the way I want to raise my kids. So, uh that'll be all. I uh I just hope that when developing and planning for developing happens that maybe we have

20
00:05:29.120 --> 00:05:45.520
more jobs for people who are looking to protect the environments and help Pasco from being poisoned in a lot of water bodies surrounding my

21
00:05:45.520 --> 00:06:02.000
home. I've seen these neon blue and green chemicals spraying and leaving residue among the ponds where of course there are animals. And I think that we need to focus more on

22
00:06:02.000 --> 00:06:29.199
areas such as that instead of trying to build more and bring more people here, make our place better. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate you coming. Good afternoon, planning commission members. Giana German, Planning,

23
00:06:29.199 --> 00:06:45.520
Development, and Economic Growth. First item on the agenda is item PC3. It's PTE 267909. A zoning amendment in the name of RNR Property Investments LLC and RNR Property Shady Hills. It's a resoning request from AR agricultural residential

24
00:06:45.520 --> 00:07:01.520
district to a C2 general commercial district located in northwest Pasco County approximately 784 ft north of the intersection of Shady Hills Road and Floralton Drive containing approximately 1 acre. Uh this item now has individuals signed up to speak and we ask that the

25
00:07:01.520 --> 00:07:22.400
item be pulled to the regular agenda. However, I would just like to clarify for housekeeping and for audience members that would like to participate today that item PC6 is Denton Avenue and this item is unrelated to that item. >> All right. So, um you asked for a PC3 to

26
00:07:22.400 --> 00:07:42.560
be pulled then. >> Yes, sir. There are now individuals who would like to speak on the item. >> The applicant present. Okay. And how many people are here to speak on that one? raise your hand. >> Okay. >> All right.

27
00:07:42.560 --> 00:07:57.440
>> The last item that we have on consent is PC4. It's PTE 262111. It's a variance request in the name of FAM residence screen enclosure. It's a variance to reduce the requirement that structures not to be located within 15

28
00:07:57.440 --> 00:08:12.960
ft from the mean high water line to be reduced from 15 to 5t located within an R4 high residential excuse me high density residential district as required by the LDC section 530.13 supplemental regulations waterfront

29
00:08:12.960 --> 00:08:31.280
property and by LDC section 10014A docks and seaw walls visibility located in southwest Pasco County approximately 78 84 ft north of the intersection of oh that is not correct approximately 1.2 miles west of US19

30
00:08:31.280 --> 00:08:48.000
containing approximately.18 acres and this item now has individuals signed up to speak as well and we request that it be pulled from the consent agenda. >> Okay. And who how many people are here to speak on this one? Okay. Is the applicant present?

31
00:08:48.000 --> 00:09:11.800
Okay. So item PC3 PC4 will be moved to the regular agenda. >> Yes, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. And then everything else is on regular right. Okay.

32
00:09:15.760 --> 00:09:33.760
>> Mr. Mr. Chair, would you like to hear item PC 3 and 4 first or would you like to move to the regular agenda? >> Um, let's go ahead and do PC 3 and four. >> Okay. >> All right.

33
00:09:33.760 --> 00:10:05.440
You're the applicant. >> I'm sorry. Okay, go ahead. >> Good afternoon, Planning Commission. Kayla U with Planning Services. PD PDE26-7909 is a resoning request to change from the AR Agricultural District to the C2

34
00:10:05.440 --> 00:10:23.839
General Commercial District in the name of RNR Property Investments LLC. The future land use is ROR in the comp plan and the applicant is requesting to develop one acre consisting of a small portion of the entire parcel for the use

35
00:10:23.839 --> 00:10:40.880
of a contractor's office and storage in conformance with section 526 of the uh land development code standards for development. The subject site is located on the east side of Shady Hills Road and approximately 784 ft north of the

36
00:10:40.880 --> 00:11:03.240
intersection of Shady Hills Road and Florton Drive. It is located within the North Market area. This is a context view of our map. As you can see, the subject property is the small portion highlighted in red.

37
00:11:05.279 --> 00:11:26.560
This is an arrow view of the map. Um, right there you can see the small portion of the um of the entire parcel right here. Once again you can see the entire parcel and the highlighted in red is the small

38
00:11:26.560 --> 00:11:47.680
portion. The surrounding future lane use to the north is ro to the east and the south is comm to the west there is both comm and res one. The surrounding zoning to the north is

39
00:11:47.680 --> 00:12:08.560
C2, to the east and to the south is AR. Uh to the west there is both C2 and AR. The subject property is subject to a natural gas easement. However, staff has already met with a representative for a site visit and confirm that the proposed

40
00:12:08.560 --> 00:12:24.160
zoning will not affect the transmission line. Access to the property is from Shady Hills Road, a county maintained collector road. There are currently no conceptual or planned trails for Shady Hills Road and

41
00:12:24.160 --> 00:12:42.560
the applicant has volunteered to record a deed restriction. This is coming with recommendation for approval of the zona request to the board of county commissioners and I'll stand by for any questions. >> All right. Do we have any questions for staff?

42
00:12:42.639 --> 00:12:59.160
Is there any type of conceptual site plan that's been submitted? >> There was a survey that they had submitted with the application,

43
00:12:59.200 --> 00:13:15.519
>> but nothing showing how they would intend to develop property. >> Uh, no, not as far as I'm aware of. >> And they're They would still be restricted from building, excuse me, on this gas easement.

44
00:13:15.519 --> 00:13:30.880
>> Uh, correct, sir. >> Okay. >> And you have a question. >> Um, I don't vote on this item unless there's a tie, but um I just was wondering if the applicant had some sort of I don't think we have pre-application

45
00:13:30.880 --> 00:13:46.639
meeting, but a preliminary meeting for site plan discussion. I'm only asking this because it is an oddly shaped parcel and once you start factoring in setbacks and stuff like that, it may make it more difficult to develop. So I was wondering if he was thinking of it

46
00:13:46.639 --> 00:14:03.760
would he be subdividing that one acre off and having on its own or how those setbacks would be some might be addressed. Not that it I mean that is a site development review kind of question. I don't know if he's thought of that far through.

47
00:14:03.760 --> 00:14:18.800
Okay, >> that was the reason for my question. >> Yeah, I just want to make sure the applicant is aware that um once he gets to site plan review that there might be constraints that might limit his potential. >> Uh thank you Amy toll planning

48
00:14:18.800 --> 00:14:35.920
development economic growth. So the applicant is available to answer that if necessary. All right. >> Very good. Any other questions for staff? Okay. If not, is the applicant present? >> Yes, the applicant is present.

49
00:14:35.920 --> 00:14:57.360
>> Jim O'Brien representing the applicant. >> Would you like to make a presentation or you want to wait for comments? >> Excuse me. >> Yes. If you wanted to make a presentation. >> Yeah. >> Do you want to make a presentation?

50
00:14:57.360 --> 00:15:13.279
That's what I'm asking. >> No. The applicant is aware that there that there will be setbacks um on that 1acre parcel and the building that they're going to proposed to build there will fit within that 1acre parcel

51
00:15:13.279 --> 00:15:34.000
including the setbacks. >> Okay. Are sorry I don't think you answered part of my question. Do you plan on subdividing that one acre section off? I if if we need to if we need to um separate that one acre off, we will

52
00:15:34.000 --> 00:15:51.519
separate that off. Um it just depends on how that the building lays out on the parcel once the engineer gets uh engaged. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Quickly, Mr. O'Brien, are you

53
00:15:51.519 --> 00:16:09.600
>> just acting as an a agent for the owner or are you an attorney? Yes, I'm acting as the agent for the owner. >> You're not an attorney? >> Not an attorney. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. Now, so is there anybody here

54
00:16:09.600 --> 00:16:29.519
to speak? >> Mr. Chair, the first individual I have signed up for this item is a Mr. Martin Dolabach. >> Okay. Mr. Dolabach. >> That's not Mr. Chair, I'm just going to open it up

55
00:16:29.519 --> 00:16:45.839
to the public if it's okay for this one because I think a few individuals may have accidentally signed up for the wrong item. >> Okay. All right. So, let me see a show of hands. Who Who's here to speak on this item? >> Okay. And you both been sworn.

56
00:16:45.839 --> 00:17:02.480
>> Yes, sir. >> Okay. If you please come at one at a time up and uh give your name and Japan address. >> I'll let ladies go first. She said she wants me to go >> and you got to listen to her. >> Uh Thomas Salado, 18235 Floralton Drive.

57
00:17:02.480 --> 00:17:20.280
That's 34610. This is it. I have some pictures. Am I allowed to give those to you? I have extra copies. >> Move to receive and file. >> Second. Have a motion and second. All in favor? >> Signify by saying I. >> I post like sign.

58
00:17:21.120 --> 00:17:37.280
Uh, thank you board for allowing me to speak. I'm opposed to this >> parcel full name. I'm sorry. And your address. >> I thought I did. I apologize. >> I just want to make sure she's >> Tom. You want me to wait? >> No. Go ahead. >> All right. Thomas Salado, 18235

59
00:17:37.280 --> 00:17:54.240
Floralton Drive. That's in Spring Hill, Florida 34610. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. Once again, members of the board, thank you for the opportunity. I'm here and I'm opposed to this parcel being reszoned. Um before you I have my

60
00:17:54.240 --> 00:18:11.039
document which I'm not going to I'm just going to highlight some bullet points of number one. We have a two-lane road there, Shady Hills Road. Um much increased vehicle flow has already seen exponentially for the last 5 years. Lots of safety concerns. There's a school

61
00:18:11.039 --> 00:18:27.280
within 300 yards. There's four schools on that road. Um the request is not consistent with Pasco County's comprehensive plan. There's policies governing the rural and agricultural future land use. Uh those areas are pretended to preserve low density

62
00:18:27.280 --> 00:18:43.919
residential and agricultural usage. We want to protect the rural character. Um C2 offers um often will allow high dens high intensity commercial operations, extended hours, significant traffic growth generation, sorry, and

63
00:18:43.919 --> 00:19:01.200
outdoor commercial activity. Um I think this would undermine the expectation and negatively impact our affected properties, noise levels, traffic patterns, and community the community character. Um, this parcel I've also I live there right on the

64
00:19:01.200 --> 00:19:17.360
backside as I told you by my address. It's been used commercially. There's some question marks there that I think the board should ask. Um, there's which the photos I provided and that's where the point I want to get to. So, I want to utilize my last minute to

65
00:19:17.360 --> 00:19:34.000
talk about that. Picture two is the entrance of the parcel and then picture three is the left side of that entrance. And then picture five is the deep use of that parcel which right now has cinder blocks, pavers,

66
00:19:34.000 --> 00:19:51.440
um some pallets, and then picture seven is a zoomed in view. You'll see these portables being stored and then a dumpster to the left there, an old dumpster. So for the last couple of years, I don't know why, but that's been the means of esstoring

67
00:19:51.440 --> 00:20:08.080
these portables on I believe that's on this adjacent property. So I'm not sure what's been going on there. Um it's not been it was supposed to be used for agricultural. It's not been used that way. Um I'm bring I'm presenting a lot of questions to the board here. Do I

68
00:20:08.080 --> 00:20:24.080
think we have some zoning violations already on this parcel, but it's up to you to decide. You guys are the experts. Thank you, gentlemen. All right. Thank you very much. Yes, sir. >> Any questions? Excuse me. >> Excuse me. I just want to let everybody

69
00:20:24.080 --> 00:20:41.039
know before we get deeper into this, we're not we don't allow any clapping or hurraying or anything like that. We just want to be respectful, give everybody a chance to speak so that we can be heard and we can carefully consider the decision. So, thank you. Appreciate your

70
00:20:41.039 --> 00:20:57.520
enthusiasm, but we want to just keep moving on. Okay. So, I think you raise your hand. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much. >> Good afternoon. Uh, my name is Danell Curl and I live at 16114 Harren Hills Drive. I live right across the street

71
00:20:57.520 --> 00:21:13.600
from Tom, so this property is is very close to to my property. So, members of the board, I'm here today to oppose the resoning of 18442 Shady Hills Road from AR to commercial. This change would directly negatively impact

72
00:21:13.600 --> 00:21:30.480
surrounding community, our safety, our environment, and the long-term livability of this area. The resoning threatens the character and stability of our community. Residents in this area chose ARZ zone neighborhoods for the character, the

73
00:21:30.480 --> 00:21:46.000
quiet environment, and the familyoriented lifestyle. Allowing this highintensity commercial use in the middle of a residential and agricultural community would disrupt that stability and erode the qualities that make this area livable.

74
00:21:46.000 --> 00:22:02.480
There would be significant safety risks for families and school children. Shady Hills Road already is very heavily traveled with limited shoulders and frequent speeding. Adding C2 commercial activity would bring more traffic, including delivery trucks and commercial

75
00:22:02.480 --> 00:22:17.520
vehicles. increasing the risk of accidents. This is especially concerning for school children, cyclists, and pedestrians that use this roadway on a daily basis. Keep in mind, the elementary school is barely

76
00:22:17.520 --> 00:22:35.039
a block over south of this parcel. The noise, lighting, and pollution will harm nearby homes. C2 zoning allows use that operates late into the evening, generates noise, requires bright lighting, and produces waste and runoff. These impacts would fall directly on

77
00:22:35.039 --> 00:22:50.720
nearby homes, reducing residents quality of life and property enjoyment as well as value. AR zoning protects residents from these intrusions. C2 does not. The area lacks infrastructure to absorb

78
00:22:50.720 --> 00:23:06.000
commercial development. The roads drainage systems and utilities in the parts of in this part of Shady Hills were not designated or excuse me were not designed for commercial intensity. Approving this resoning would strain existing infrastructure and likely

79
00:23:06.000 --> 00:23:23.280
require future taxpayer funded upgrades, burdens that should not be placed on residents for project that does not serve our community needs. The environmental impacts would be significant and irreversible. The proposed C2 zoning poses serious

80
00:23:23.280 --> 00:23:40.559
environmental risks that would directly affect residents and the surrounding ecosystem to include groundwater vulnerability. This area relies heavily on wellwater. Commercial uses permitted under C2 zoning increase the risk of chemical runoff, fuel leaks, and contaminated

81
00:23:40.559 --> 00:23:57.039
storm water entering the aquifer. Once groundwater is compromised, the danger is longasting and costly to remedy. Storm water and flooding concerns. Commercial development typically replaces natural ground with surfaces such as asphalt and concrete. This

82
00:23:57.039 --> 00:24:12.480
increases storm water runoff, overwhelms drainage systems, and raises the risk of localized flooding on neighboring properties. Wildlife habitat disruption. The ARZ zoned land supports birds, pollinators, and other wildlife that rely on open

83
00:24:12.480 --> 00:24:29.760
spaces. Commercial activity, lighting, and noise would fragment habitat and push wildlife further into the roadways and the residential area. Loss of tree canopy and natural buffers. Clearing this land for commercial use removes natural vegetation that

84
00:24:29.760 --> 00:24:45.279
currently provides shade, erosion control, and noise buffering. This loss would permanently alter the environmental balance of our area. >> Okay. >> Is that my warning? >> That is actually your time up. I think your warning light went off earlier.

85
00:24:45.279 --> 00:25:01.039
>> Okay. Sorry, I'm not familiar with this. >> That's okay. No problem. I uh wanted to try to give you as much time as possible. So, uh, do you have any final words you want to say? >> Yes. Um, for these reasons, I strongly urge you, um, to deny this resoning

86
00:25:01.039 --> 00:25:21.120
request. Protecting the safety, character, and well-being of our neighborhood is should be the utmost concern. >> Okay. Thank you. That is a very good presentation. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um, just to ask the staff, the property just north of uh this

87
00:25:21.120 --> 00:25:36.159
property, what is that? What's the zoning on that? >> Yeah, we had reszoned that not long ago >> to what, John? >> That's what I was trying to remember. It says C2 on the property appraiser, but I'm pretty sure we did an MPUD on that property. >> Amy Toll, Planning, Development, and

88
00:25:36.159 --> 00:25:53.440
Economic Growth. I believe you're correct on that and the map is incorrect. It should be MPU for town homes. >> Yeah, I think Miss Wilhight, was that your case? Nickarus Pito's plan development economic growth the public hearing occurred at planning commission but the

89
00:25:53.440 --> 00:26:16.960
item is pending at the board level still >> so it's continued to a date uncertain >> it was for town homes >> it was for town homes >> town homes >> all right >> did we get everybody to speak Amy did you have more you wanted to say? >> Um, no. I'm just here if you have any

90
00:26:16.960 --> 00:26:38.880
additional questions. >> Okay. Are there any more questions for Amy? >> Okay. Anybody else wanted to speak? >> Good afternoon. For the record, Michael Razer, Razer Transportation Consulting. Um, I have been sworn uh 1 19046 Bruce

91
00:26:38.880 --> 00:26:56.159
B. Downs Boulevard, number 308 Tampa. Um, I noticed this item on the agenda as I was leaving the office, so I grabbed my report. I wasn't expecting to speak on this today, but I do have some transportation information to provide as there was opposition testimony in that

92
00:26:56.159 --> 00:27:10.480
regard. Um, we did a timing and phasing analysis which looked at the reasonable yield for the C2 portion which is approximately 1 acre. The reasonable yield was calculated based on the land development code formula which assumes

93
00:27:10.480 --> 00:27:29.200
75% of the um property is developed with medium to medium high intensity uses and the resulting level of service on Shady Hills Road was level of service D um as compared to a level of service D standard. So with this development in

94
00:27:29.200 --> 00:27:44.320
place, it it would still meet the adopted level of service and there were no issues with the study intersections. And also I'd like to point out and don't have the year here yet. I didn't get to that page, but Shady Hills Road is in the long range transportation plan is being widened to four lanes from

95
00:27:44.320 --> 00:27:58.399
Hernando County to State Road 52. >> So Mike, I realize that there may not be a design done yet. Do we know what the ultimate rightaway

96
00:27:58.399 --> 00:28:16.320
width will be for Shady Hills Road? >> John, if that's a question, I I don't know. I did not get into right away for this. It was a Uklitian timing in phasing. So, I was min minimal involvement. >> I got you. >> Is there anybody on staff that knows

97
00:28:16.320 --> 00:28:37.679
that qu answer to that question? >> I think it's in finding fact 12. Yeah. >> So, what does it say, John? >> 160 ft. >> And the current rightway width is >> 60. >> 60. So, there would be 50 feet that would have to come off the frontage of

98
00:28:37.679 --> 00:28:54.080
that property to accommodate the widening of Shady Hills Road, >> right? >> That the is that in the is that currently in the corridor preservation tables? I mean, would he be required to give

99
00:28:54.080 --> 00:29:10.080
that today if he came in with a development application? >> Hi, good afternoon uh commission uh Bennett Elbow here with transportation planning. Um yes sir. So that that is from the uh table of the comprehensive

100
00:29:10.080 --> 00:29:27.679
uh plan. The uh right ultimate rightaway width is 160. That is correct. There's currently 60. >> Um, and it is currently um, >> yeah, that I I need to check on that.

101
00:29:27.679 --> 00:29:43.279
>> I think Miss Will height's trying to help you out. >> Yeah. >> Oh, sorry. >> Barbara Will height 6327 Grand Boulevard. Um, so that is what the current table says, but from my experience based upon the project to the north that's still pending the the if

102
00:29:43.279 --> 00:30:00.080
you look at the transportation tables that you've looked at for the 2050 update, you'll see that they've changed that cross-section or or the ultimate width. I wish uh Nick was here because he know off the top of his head, but it's definitely being changed from that width to a much smaller width.

103
00:30:00.080 --> 00:30:16.880
>> I'll see if I can look it up and get you the answer. Um, if you want to kick this for a moment and I want you to have the right facts. So, >> I appreciate that. >> I have it where we reduced it. I remember that. >> He's got it. All right. He's got it. >> There's a lot of people helping out with this one. >> Sorry about that. William playing

104
00:30:16.880 --> 00:30:34.559
>> development, economic growth. Oh, we we reduced this if if the planning commission remembers, we had a number of projects on Shady Hills Road that brought the widening to the forefront in terms of its timeline and it was reduced to 124 ft ultimate as the four lane.

105
00:30:34.559 --> 00:30:49.760
>> So, all right, but we'd still be looking at 32 feet of right away >> in terms of what's required to be given by this project. >> Yes. I can't speak to what should be given for this since I didn't work on that, but

106
00:30:49.760 --> 00:31:13.679
that sounds correct to me. >> Okay. >> Well, if if that's correct, then finding 12 is not accurate because right now it says 50 ft. >> Is it necessarily accurate? Because has that actually been approved yet for a

107
00:31:13.679 --> 00:31:35.039
reduction? >> Yeah. >> Well, I don't know. >> I'm asking. >> No, that's the proposed comp plan. It's not in the new It's not in the existing comp. >> I I mean, I think it should be noted,

108
00:31:35.039 --> 00:31:51.919
but I don't think finding 12 is correct. >> You probably should have a copy though. says something like unless otherwise approved at the time of PSP or something like that. The problem with the way it's worded right now is it doesn't it's abs doesn't

109
00:31:51.919 --> 00:32:11.279
have any wiggle room. >> I mean, can they get right away from the other side of the street anyway? There's a there's a house across the street across the street. >> Well, they would have to take it, >> right? 100% >> the the point I was trying to get to that in this case

110
00:32:11.279 --> 00:32:29.440
depending upon when his development application comes in under current comp plan or new comp plan at the end of the day there's going to be >> for our corridor preservation ordinance there's going to be a right-of-way dedication which then goes to Liam's

111
00:32:29.440 --> 00:32:46.880
point that he was trying to make that after we get the rightway dedication and the If this is C2, that'll be a 25 foot front setback. >> The rear setback would so you would lose the rightway dedication plus the 25 ft. Um, and the way the code is written for

112
00:32:46.880 --> 00:33:04.640
the rear setback, it calls that um when adjacent to residential districts and then adjacent to commercial and industrial, it doesn't talk about agricultural district, which is what the rear would be. And historically, that was always assumed that it was 30 feet. So you would have the rightway in the

113
00:33:04.640 --> 00:33:24.120
front plus 25 ft and then a 30 foot rear. >> You could put a build a pencil on there, right? >> I'm not saying you couldn't put something there. I just don't know if the applicant has thought that far >> mat went out of business a long time ago.

114
00:33:25.600 --> 00:33:42.480
>> All right. Well, >> I also want to make a comment only because this was submitted for the record was the photos and I understand the applicants see that in photo six it looks like there is yard debris which is a conditional use

115
00:33:42.480 --> 00:33:58.000
um in C2. So I don't know if there's a code violation or if that is actually yard debris. It's kind of hard to see in photo six that was submitted to us, but just want to note that if that is yard trash debris,

116
00:33:58.000 --> 00:34:22.079
then that might require a conditional use. And I assume there's no staff, there's no permits for the portable buildings that are currently on the site, which I've personally driven by and seen. That's a question for staff,

117
00:34:22.079 --> 00:34:40.480
>> John. >> Yes, that was a question for staff. >> Well, now I asked if there were permits for those portable buildings that are there. >> Nick would not know the answer. Go >> for Nick. >> Nick just answers the road.

118
00:34:40.480 --> 00:34:56.320
>> Mr. Chairman, >> yes. or over here those plane developing economic growth. >> Oh, >> right here. >> There you are. >> So, we're not aware of any code issues regarding those uh structures.

119
00:34:56.320 --> 00:35:11.040
Um, >> what does that mean? >> There's no violations. So, >> so I can just go put a portable on my lot and there's no violation to do that without a permit. >> That's not >> The portables are on the adjacent lot.

120
00:35:11.040 --> 00:35:30.200
The portables are on the adjacent lot. >> They're not on your property. >> No. >> Okay. All right. That's what I'm trying to understand. >> So, these are not pictures of the property that we're looking at.

121
00:35:31.839 --> 00:36:06.560
>> I think what they were saying, the point of access to that is looks like it's from this piece of property. They're sitting on the adjacent part. >> Thank you. I and I have a question. >> Yeah. >> Um I know there is a reasonzoning application that is continued to a date

122
00:36:06.560 --> 00:36:22.320
uncertain to the north. I'm wondering if that includes and maybe Miss Wilhight can answer um that portion that has those two portable buildings or if the MPUD stops at that boundary to the north. >> Sorry, Barbara for putting you on the

123
00:36:22.320 --> 00:36:51.520
spot. No rush. or if you know the reasoning I can I can pull it up myself over here if somebody knows the resoning number or something like that. >> Well, if you're going to speak though, you got to be on the microphone, please. >> Good afternoon everyone. Joe Simino 12363

124
00:36:51.520 --> 00:37:07.760
Hampton Park Boulevard, Tampa, Florida 33624. Um, we were involved I was involved in the reszoning to the north. I don't have the MPUD number off the top of my head, but I do have it open here. And we are showing a

125
00:37:07.760 --> 00:37:26.079
124 foot proposed right ofway with a 62 foot proposed half width which equal a 29 ft rightway dedication. And that's to the north. >> Okay. >> Did that include the parcel with the

126
00:37:26.079 --> 00:37:43.400
portables on it? >> If the applicant appears to be >> correct that the portable >> consensus is no, it does not include that parcel. >> So there's a parcel in between. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. >> And the portables are not on the applicant's properties. >> Okay.

127
00:37:49.359 --> 00:38:05.520
All right. >> So, >> is there anybody else to speak? You can only get you only get one bite at the apples. >> I just wonder if I want to >> I'm sorry. You can't speak from the audience. >> And if if there's anybody that would like to have him answer a question, you're welcome to invite him up. >> I'll have Mr. Salado,

128
00:38:05.520 --> 00:38:22.000
>> but when you come up, I just want it's a good thing for me to tell you right now. >> You don't come up two times or three times. >> I understand one time. >> I just wanted to restate what I said. I understood that the portables were not on that property. It's the means of aggress of getting to that property

129
00:38:22.000 --> 00:38:38.160
that's being used by the current parcel that's up. That's what I was trying to convey to you. >> I got you. >> Thank you, sir. >> I can see where they're driving on to this parcel and making it affordable. >> Okay. So, I still have an outstanding

130
00:38:38.160 --> 00:38:55.520
question of why the property to the north we're asking for 29 ft, but then we have an agenda memo here where we're asking for 50 ft. Can somebody address that question? >> Um, Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. >> Nectario's plan development and economic

131
00:38:55.520 --> 00:39:11.280
growth. Um, the finding of fact number 12 is referencing 160 ft based on the current comprehensive plan. So that's the actual number that we have on the books right now. >> Okay. >> In the we've worked with the county engineer and obviously in other projects

132
00:39:11.280 --> 00:39:26.240
where we we identified an alternative rightway width for Shady Hills Road from uh County Line Road on the north to Bosley on the south. Um that's 124 ft in the Pesco 2050 comprehensive plan update. and that would be consistent

133
00:39:26.240 --> 00:39:43.680
with uh the conditions of approval that were mentioned in the MPU to the north of this property that Mr. Simino had discussed. Um so we're not referencing the 124 ft because that's not yet approved by the board of county commissioners. >> Is it being the property is that being

134
00:39:43.680 --> 00:40:00.079
done like through an LDC variation of some kind? >> Yes. >> An LDC variation or alternative standard to the rightway? Well, is it being done through some kind of variation to the code? The one to the north? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Well, then that would explain it.

135
00:40:00.079 --> 00:40:17.200
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, is there anybody to speak on this uh here or ask questions here that has not spoken? If not, the applicant has an opportunity

136
00:40:17.200 --> 00:40:34.560
to respond to any questions. Well, I still have one more question for staff. >> Okay. >> So, how confident is staff that once you apply the required rightaway dedication and the setbacks that you can fit a building on

137
00:40:34.560 --> 00:40:55.839
this site? >> What's the depth of that northern line on the top? >> Northern line. What's the depth? >> There's no numbers there. The >> property appraiser says it's just shy of

138
00:40:55.839 --> 00:41:20.400
200 199.99. >> So you have to set back uh would you say 50t from the back? Liam >> zoning question. um 30 ft from the rear and then it would be the rightway with whatever that was determined plus 25. Um

139
00:41:20.400 --> 00:41:34.960
I will say since the reason why I was asking about the parcel to the north on if it was included in the NPU or not because if it is approved that MPUD that setback would be different because it would still be C2 adjacent then that could be a zero foot setback.

140
00:41:34.960 --> 00:41:53.040
So in this case, Liam, >> oh gosh, >> his rear yard is the easement. >> That's why I was asking where >> the setback line's going to get measured from the other side of the easement. >> Correct. >> That's why I was asking earlier lotion.

141
00:41:53.040 --> 00:42:17.920
>> Correct. If he was going to subdivide the property. So it would be measured from the other side of the easement, but if he subdivides, it would be 30 feet. >> Correct. >> Are those two easement or those two

142
00:42:17.920 --> 00:42:33.200
segments that we're looking at now under two different ownership names? >> No. The the easement area in this one acre portion is all under one owner. >> And do we know does anybody know if the

143
00:42:33.200 --> 00:43:03.280
gas easement is an exclusive easement or is it a non-exclusive easement? >> It is a non-exclusive easement. So in theory, if it is non-exclusive, although he could not build a structure on the easement, he could potentially build parking andor storage on the

144
00:43:03.280 --> 00:43:20.319
easement. I >> correct. It is a non-exclusive easement which enables the owner to build parking on there. And that's probably why based on the conversations with the client's

145
00:43:20.319 --> 00:43:36.400
engineer to date, they would probably not subdivide that parcel. >> And so then they would be able to use the rear portion of the parcel towards their setback. >> Is it strictly a gas ement or is there

146
00:43:36.400 --> 00:43:52.400
power lines there too? >> Power. >> They're power. I see a power trans power in the photo. Okay. Well, it may be a non-exclusive easement for gas, but Duke's going to have something to say about under their

147
00:43:52.400 --> 00:44:09.760
power lines. >> Uh, >> we have met with Duke. >> We have met with Duke Energy on site as well to clarify what we're able to do. >> So, are you able to provide us any type of conceptual development plan?

148
00:44:09.760 --> 00:44:25.280
Yeah, because it all dep it it's very going to be a very flexible um small building that will be designed based on the setbacks once we get the zoning approved. So that's why the client chose

149
00:44:25.280 --> 00:44:43.119
to wait to get a development plan in place um beforehand. >> You said the client I asked you before if you were an attorney. >> No, I'm not an attorney. Okay. What's your role?

150
00:44:43.119 --> 00:45:02.640
>> My role is that I just represent the the applicant. >> You call them your client. >> I'm a I'm a I'm a real estate I'm a real estate broker in the county. >> Okay. >> Amy, Amy, did you have something you wanted to insert?

151
00:45:02.640 --> 00:45:20.160
Uh, I was just going to also confirm that we spoke to Duke and they didn't have any opposition to this change as well. >> Okay. Well, I still need you to answer my question, which is are how confident are you that when you apply the setbacks and the rightway that a building can be

152
00:45:20.160 --> 00:45:40.000
built on this property? >> I measured once setbacks were taken into consideration measuring from the easement, the west side of the easement, I'll call it. Um, it was about 144 feet of depth

153
00:45:40.000 --> 00:46:02.000
to available to put a building on, which of course as you move south into the triangle, it's going to is going to shrink a little bit, but at the very north end of the site, it's going to be about 144 ft. And only the little triangle is proposed

154
00:46:02.000 --> 00:46:41.280
for C2. >> Correct. And is there any other commercial property in the immediate vicinity? But it does appear that there's some C2 zoning along that stretch of Shady Hills.

155
00:46:41.280 --> 00:47:15.760
>> Correct. Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. I'm sorry. Just to facilitate the conversation a little bit with regard to the rural character area. Um the rural character area, it ends on the west side

156
00:47:15.760 --> 00:47:32.319
of Shady Hills. Um and in the Pasco 2050 comprehensive plan update, the boundary of the rule character is actually going to get pulled off of Shady Hills by um one partial depth uh from the road. So that Shady Hills

157
00:47:32.319 --> 00:47:49.280
Road properly is the whole corridor is outside of the road character area. The subject property as well as the C2 that you see on the map there. Um those are in uh the RO uh future land use category which will

158
00:47:49.280 --> 00:48:06.079
remain as part of pass 2050. So these are uh areas that were designated mostly non rural uh according to the comprehensive plan. The same is going to be true along county line road where the car rural character area will be pulled off of county line to respect the

159
00:48:06.079 --> 00:48:38.160
commercial depth that's fronting along along county line road going west from Shady Hills. Okay. So, so the staff's recommending approval. >> Yes, sir. >> Question for staff. as I read the

160
00:48:38.160 --> 00:48:53.359
background and and what the what they're actually asking for. And I know it's it's C2 zoning, so it's not really use prohibitive, but there's a statement in there that says they do allow for the use of a contractor's office and associated storage. If I look at the C2

161
00:48:53.359 --> 00:49:09.839
zoning requirement when it talks about contractor's office and there's a where is it? >> It's number 11. >> Number 11. It says all storage shall be inside the building or in an enclosed area not visible from the right of way. Does that pro so that restriction would

162
00:49:09.839 --> 00:49:28.000
be on the storage. It couldn't be outside storage of contractor materials etc. So okay just wanted to clarify >> Mr. Chair, it's up to planning commission what you do with it. But if the this is approved, I think planning 12 needs to be changed to say that it

163
00:49:28.000 --> 00:49:45.200
should say unless otherwise approved at the time of preliminary site plan or preliminary development plan review that they have to dedicate 50 ft. I don't think it's appropriate that we're considering a variance for the property to the north and then we're not willing

164
00:49:45.200 --> 00:50:05.520
to at least consider one for this property. Amy Tol, we can add that standard language. >> Okay. So moved >> to approve. Okay. So we have a motion to

165
00:50:05.520 --> 00:50:22.240
approve subject to the most recent comment. Um any further discussion on the motion? I have a second. >> I'll second that. discussion. >> Yes.

166
00:50:22.240 --> 00:50:39.839
>> So along the west side of Shady Hills Road adjacent to the northern portion of this property, the future land use is comm. The zoning is C2 and it goes all the way up to county line.

167
00:50:39.839 --> 00:50:59.359
I know there is a pending MPU for town houses, but it's not yet been approved. One parcel to the north of this. My first thought was

168
00:50:59.359 --> 00:51:16.000
we're asking for C2 out here in this rural area and this would be spot zoning. But after reviewing the map and seeing all of the C2 on the west side of Shady Hills and then all the way up to Shady Hills, currently on the east side,

169
00:51:16.000 --> 00:51:34.280
this just appears to be a natural extension down to the apex of the triangle. I will caution the applicant that as per Liam who used to be our in-house zoning expert, one of them,

170
00:51:34.640 --> 00:51:50.800
you're going to have fun trying to develop this property because you're going to find that there's not a lot of buildable area. And I would tell you that perhaps you should have gone and seen an engineer and had some conceptual layout before you did this, but that'll be your

171
00:51:50.800 --> 00:52:09.359
gamble, I guess. But I don't find this to be spot zoning, and it just appears to be a minor continuation of the CT district that's already there. >> All right. Any further discussion? Have motion. We have a second.

172
00:52:09.359 --> 00:52:24.319
No, there was no further discussion. All in favor of the motion signify by saying I >> I like sign. >> Okay. Motion carries. >> I would just like to thank everybody out there who helped with that item. >> Yes.

173
00:52:24.319 --> 00:53:03.440
>> Real team effort. >> Is that like an amicus? >> All right. PC4. Good afternoon. Amy Tol with planning development and economic growth. The item before you is PTE 26-2111.

174
00:53:03.440 --> 00:53:19.760
It's a zoning variance uh requesting an amendment or variance to LDC section 530.13A supplemental regulations and waterfront property and LDC section 1014A docks and seaw walls visibility. The subject uh

175
00:53:19.760 --> 00:53:35.680
application is in the name of VA2 VA-2111 FAM variance request. The subject site is located in an R4 highdensity residential district with a feature land use of res 9 residential nine dwelling units per gross acre. The

176
00:53:35.680 --> 00:53:53.040
purpose of the variance request is to reduce the mean high water line enclosure setback from 50 ft to 5 ft. The location is at 3872 Top Sail Trail approximately 1.2 miles west of US Highway 19. Here is a location map

177
00:53:53.040 --> 00:54:07.839
showing that the subject site is in the river district of the West Market area and within the urban service area. Here's a context map highlighting the subject sites and the aerial imagery. Here's a zoomed in version of the aerial

178
00:54:07.839 --> 00:54:26.400
imagery. The future land use is res six. Res six, I think that says. I'm sorry, I can't read that. uh zoning is R4. Here's a concept plan showing the or a

179
00:54:26.400 --> 00:54:43.200
site plan showing the actual home with the um pool and the highlighted setbacks that are existing. The project overview. So the applicant has requested a variance to reduce the mean high water line enclosure setback

180
00:54:43.200 --> 00:54:59.760
from 15 ft to 5 ft in an R4 highdensity residential district as required by the land development code section 530.13A supplemental regulations uh for waterfront property and by LDC section 1014A

181
00:54:59.760 --> 00:55:21.760
docks and seaw walls for visibility. Here's the zoning code for the waterfront property. and the zoning code for the docks and seaw walls. The recommended conditions are that the property owner may request to comply with the following items. uh limit the

182
00:55:21.760 --> 00:55:37.680
variance to the lot area as built. Comply with all other maximum and minimum bulk standards. Acknowledge that the site is subject to the flood damage prevention ordinance. Acknowledge an appeal may be filed and the effective date of the approval by completing the

183
00:55:37.680 --> 00:55:53.119
acknowledgement documents. And with that, we recommend to approve the proposed variance with conditions as set forth under the recommended conditions section below. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. And then we also have the applicant here to advise as well.

184
00:55:53.119 --> 00:56:10.160
>> Is it a fact that the applicant applied for a permit for this structure and was granted the permit? >> Uh he applied for the permit, the site plan was approved and well he applied for the site plan. The structure was

185
00:56:10.160 --> 00:56:25.760
built based on the approval from the county. He went for a final permit and then they >> What do you mean he went for a final >> for the certificate of occupants or the final permit to grant the uh enclosure? >> The final inspection was issued a

186
00:56:25.760 --> 00:56:44.160
building permit for the enclosure. >> Thank you. >> So there was an error by the building department in issuing the permit. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Any other questions?

187
00:56:44.160 --> 00:57:02.559
>> Yeah. So, is this a staff initiated variance? >> No. >> Did the applicant have to pay the fees to apply for the variance? >> I would guess yes. Yes. Yes. Yes, he

188
00:57:02.559 --> 00:57:30.960
did. >> Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? All right. Um, I'm sorry, you're the applicant. >> Okay. Is anyone else here to speak on this besides the applicant?

189
00:57:30.960 --> 00:57:45.760
>> Mr. Chair, the only individual I have signed up for this item is a Mr. Doug Tilly. >> Could I ask the applicant a question real quick? Yeah, the applicant will come up or come up to the >> applicant's entitled to make a presentation first if he wants to make

190
00:57:45.760 --> 00:58:01.119
one. Sir, you need to let the applicant speak first. If he wants to speak, >> you want me to speak first? >> He's just coming up to answer a question. >> Could you u >> Did you want to make a present about your case? >> My name's Mark Weiss. I live at 4903

191
00:58:01.119 --> 00:58:17.040
Blue Heron Drive, 33 uh 345 33546. I actually live in this neighborhood and have for a while. Um, I have a statement from the owner of the home. The owner

192
00:58:17.040 --> 00:58:32.880
bought a new pool with an enclosure. The pool was done with a permitted uh footer for the enclosure. The permit for the enclosure was submitted and given. Everything was

193
00:58:32.880 --> 00:58:48.720
built upon calling and final inspection. this issue was brought up. This particular property is in a corner of the very end of a canal. So, it has no blockage or views of anybody around it.

194
00:58:48.720 --> 00:59:03.200
The house next door adjacent to it, which is actually facing, you know, it's right next door. Their enclosure is only 8 ft. There's many places on these canals of this older neighborhood where

195
00:59:03.200 --> 00:59:19.839
this setback is not, you know, they're not all too in compliance. Some are very old. As far as the letter from the homeowner, I would like to read it. Um, I am writing this as a homeowner, deeply

196
00:59:19.839 --> 00:59:34.400
frustrated by recent events. Your department granted a full permit for the pool enclosure on my property. I followed all regulations, hired a licensed contractor, spent thousands of dollars completing the structure. This enclosure was an integral integral part

197
00:59:34.400 --> 00:59:52.240
to my overall project which included pool itself which included the pool itself. Without proper enclosure, I would have never installed the pool as a mosquito issue in our area severe. Now, after it's built, I'm told within the setback and requires a variance, I

198
00:59:52.240 --> 01:00:08.559
implying that I need may need to remove it. This is unacceptable. Your approval process should have prevented such costly mistakes. I trusted the permit meant everything was in order. The financial burden and emotional stress this has caused me is immense. I expect the county to take

199
01:00:08.559 --> 01:00:23.920
responsibility and sure a fair resolution without further hardship on my part. So I understand the code. Like I said, I live on waterfront property and the 15oot setback after that. If you're in a

200
01:00:23.920 --> 01:00:39.760
backyard, these houses are all different. Some are set back, some are forward, but it would it would impede people's view. In this case, it does not. And I believe it should be passed. >> Sir, what is your relationship to the owner? >> I actually am the contractor for the

201
01:00:39.760 --> 01:00:54.960
pool enclosure, but that pool enclosure was sold from a pool company. Okay. One of the pool com several pool companies that I built pool enclosures from. He asked me to handle it and I did so because you know he's doesn't speak very good English and he's been there a long

202
01:00:54.960 --> 01:01:11.599
time and it was really the pool co you know whose fault is it. >> Yeah. >> Everybody I we all followed the rules. We got the permits. We built the things. I built about 300 of these pool enclosures a year um all over the Troy County area. So we're pretty particular. We're good company and we've been

203
01:01:11.599 --> 01:01:29.040
around. So when I I saw his hardship and I volunteered to be his representative and I filled out everything for him. >> All right. Thank you very much. What >> did you have another question? >> He'll come up again.

204
01:01:29.040 --> 01:01:46.240
>> Yeah. Why don't you stay up close here? >> Okay. >> All right. So you get your name and address. >> I'm Doug Tilly. Uh 3866 Top Sale Trail. I own a parcel west of Mr. Sham. I have no problem with it.

205
01:01:46.240 --> 01:02:01.920
I think the question here was half of his property is landlocked and the other half is on the water. He's in that corner there which is also going to impede a dock or anything water right there. But as far as obstruction or

206
01:02:01.920 --> 01:02:17.680
that, if you're, you know, in the middle of the canal and you have that sticking out, then you're obstructing the so-called water view, you know, canal. >> But, uh, I I don't have any any problems

207
01:02:17.680 --> 01:02:32.559
with it. I used to be able to peek over the fence and see where the tide was, you know, but, uh, >> maybe you need a need a ladder. >> Yeah. But uh I go on up roof and I can >> Okay. But uh I don't see any issues

208
01:02:32.559 --> 01:02:50.079
there and neither does the gentleman on the other side of it because with the location of it being on the side there, you know, you've got quite a a unique situation in that subdivision with the water, no backyards because it goes

209
01:02:50.079 --> 01:03:06.640
right to the seaw wall and uh but uh that's you know and I think there might have been a question there about the variance because of it half landlocked there, you know, the back of his

210
01:03:06.640 --> 01:03:24.720
property meeting the side of my our backyard, >> right? >> Uh neighbors. So, I think there might have been, you know, and there's probably someone now going, "Well, he did it. Why can't I?" You know, you're going to get that. But uh yeah, I I

211
01:03:24.720 --> 01:03:41.920
don't feel it's any it's nobody's at fault here. It was just over overlooked. You know, the inspectors weren't sure. You know, the contractor wasn't sure. You know, somewhere else it might have been more of an issue.

212
01:03:41.920 --> 01:03:57.359
>> All right. >> But thank you. >> I I fully support all this. I I wasn't planning on showing up and then I heard uh there were some people that might be opposed to all this. >> It's like why? Yeah.

213
01:03:57.359 --> 01:04:15.760
>> But uh that's all that's all I have to say. >> Thank you. We appreciate you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Is there anything the applicant would like to add to that? >> Not really. Like I said, it's a pretty

214
01:04:15.760 --> 01:04:32.079
much open and close case. And and the other thing is is like you said, these certain areas at the end of these canals, they're not even allowed to have a boat ramp. There's certain houses in certain places that because the area is

215
01:04:32.079 --> 01:04:49.280
in a corner, only 15 ft maybe of his 50ft property is Seawwalled, but you have the other one coming in. So those are irregular situations, but they are on certain canals in that neighborhood. I think it was just unfortunate for the man and it's been two years because of

216
01:04:49.280 --> 01:05:06.240
the flood, so everything got pushed back. So he'll be happy just to see this go through and know that he can keep his pool. >> Yeah, I'm sure he would be. Yeah. Okay. Well, thank you. >> All right. Um, so do I have a motion?

217
01:05:06.240 --> 01:05:26.559
>> I move to recommend approval. We are the f we are the decision. >> Not a recommend. This is a >> Okay. Well, then move to approve the variance. >> Second. >> A motion. A second. Further discussion of the motion. >> When you make a mistake, you admit to it

218
01:05:26.559 --> 01:05:43.760
and you fix it. And Mr. Angel, I hope we will refund the applicant's fee for the variance. That's not his fault. He applied, his contractor applied for the permit. He

219
01:05:43.760 --> 01:06:00.480
was granted a permit. I'm very familiar with this section of the code because I have done a lot of pools and golfers. I know all about this section. The building department made an honest mistake. Not saying there was something bad

220
01:06:00.480 --> 01:06:15.920
happened, but when you make a mistake, you admit to it. Why should the applicant have to pay? They had to pay the cost of advertising. They had to pay the application fee. Whatever other paperwork they needed to fill out, somebody should eat that. You know, we

221
01:06:15.920 --> 01:06:33.240
just recently had a case before the board where the building department issued a permit for a mobile home where they shouldn't have. And the county had to buy that mobile home and buy the guy a modular home to make it legal under the zoning code.

222
01:06:33.280 --> 01:06:49.039
I don't think it's that much of a burden on the county to eat the fees for this one. I'm and I'm disappointed. And I'm going to I'm going to tell you something. I'm trying to say this without being overly nasty to staff, but I thought it was very disingenuous to

223
01:06:49.039 --> 01:07:04.000
come up here and not include in your presentation that this was an error made by the building department. That's a material fact to this case. You know, it was omitted from the presentation. I had to ask for it.

224
01:07:04.000 --> 01:07:21.680
>> Well, thank you, Mr. Moody. David Engel, planning and economic development director. I agree. We should own our mistakes. Uh I do have the delegated authority to wave the fee and I will do so. I I wasn't aware of all this background. Thank you. >> Thank you, David. Appreciate that.

225
01:07:21.680 --> 01:07:39.440
>> All right, we have a motion and we have a second. All in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> Oppos like sign. All right, problem solved. >> The next item on the agenda is item PC5. It's PDE 267897,

226
01:07:39.440 --> 01:07:55.920
a zoning amendment in the name of Mitchell, 54 West, MPUD, an Eminem route, 54 West LLC. It's a substantial amendment from MPD master plan units development to MPD master plan unit development to allow for the removal of the transit oriented design and mixeduse

227
01:07:55.920 --> 01:08:12.640
trip reduction measure requirements and to reduce the non-residential entitlements to 460,000 ft of commercial and add 240 hotel rooms and associated infrastructure in southwest Pasco County located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of state road 54 and Little

228
01:08:12.640 --> 01:08:33.359
Road containing approximately 330 acres to be presented by staff. >> Good afternoon. William Vermillion, Planning Development, Economic Growth. As previously mentioned, this is a substantial modification to the Mitchell

229
01:08:33.359 --> 01:08:54.799
54 West MPD PTE 267897. Here is the location map for the subject site of the existing MPUD. Um, for those of you familiar, this is right behind uh the sprouts over there on uh 54 and Little.

230
01:08:54.799 --> 01:09:11.359
This substantial modification is to remove the previously approved requirement for transit oriented design and mixeduse trip reduction measures measures mutum. So, as I move forward and I say to and I say mutram, it's because both of those are a little bit of a mouthful. So, I'll abbreviate them

231
01:09:11.359 --> 01:09:27.520
as I as I proceed here. It's also to reduce um the existing entitlements. I do have a slide moving forward that shows the the before and after and the built entitlements on the subject site. It will end up being a total of 460,000

232
01:09:27.520 --> 01:09:44.159
square ft of commercial retail, 240 hotel rooms and the associated infrastructure on approximately 330 acres. This is at that southwest quadrant of the intersection of Little Road and State Road 54. uh right behind the BR uh the Sprouts there and uh just

233
01:09:44.159 --> 01:10:00.640
north of the Bryant Square uh development that was a part of this MPU. Here's the location map. As you can see, the the roadway infrastructure is already built on the subject site as a part of the original MPD approval in 2015 um with the roundabout there up to State

234
01:10:00.640 --> 01:10:17.440
Road 54. the current zoning map reflecting MPD and the PD future land use. Here is the uh the existing entitlements, the originally approved entitlements and the proposed

235
01:10:17.440 --> 01:10:33.440
entitlements. You can see there in the approved, it was originally approved for 980,000 square ft of commercial 800 residential dwelling units and it when it was approved, it had a an older loom that allowed the exchange of entitlements to multif family, which is

236
01:10:33.440 --> 01:10:50.159
something that PTE has moved away from in the future. So, as a part of the the modification to this, the loom being proposed prevents the conversion of any non-residential land use to a residential land use. Um the existing entitlements 175,000 square feet of the

237
01:10:50.159 --> 01:11:05.840
commercial retail are currently built which is that that shopping center. 240 single family detached and 422 town homes are currently constructed so that the new total entitlements reflect those existing and proposed. The total 460,000

238
01:11:05.840 --> 01:11:24.080
ft of commercial. the 662 residential dwelling units because they already exist and the addition of 240 hotel rooms. It is worth noting the hotel rooms were a previously approved use as a part of the original 980,000 square ft. Whenever

239
01:11:24.080 --> 01:11:40.800
the applicant proposed to reduce um to 460, we specifically called out 240 hotel rooms as a separate entitlement from commercial. Um it actually ended up being a little bit easier in terms of estimating the impacts transportation wise because when you study commercial

240
01:11:40.800 --> 01:11:55.520
and its face it is a little bit of a different trip generation than hotel the impacts infrastructure a little bit different. And then as I move forward there are some implications to the removal of tod and mutram. The most

241
01:11:55.520 --> 01:12:11.440
substantial of which is going to be in a companion EDA at the board which is a clawback of the reduced fees that were originally granted to the development and received cos for. So those those fees were already paid. the the applicant is responsible for an

242
01:12:11.440 --> 01:12:27.760
approximate 3.591 million repayment to the county as a part of those reduced fees that were granted either with the 25% reduction for mutum or the uh 50% reduction that's with to

243
01:12:27.760 --> 01:12:42.719
um all the transportation mitigation requirements from the original MPD as I move forward with the master plan they all remain the same um because with the reduction of entitlements the actual trips being generated on State Road 54 and at the different intersectional

244
01:12:42.719 --> 01:13:00.640
locations has been reduced. And I guess it is worth noting that even though the this project is having less transportation impacts, their mitigation requirements are still the same as if they were doing the original 980,000 and

245
01:13:00.640 --> 01:13:16.159
the original 800 residential. This is the original master plan. So the subject side of the modification within the MPUD is actually just a portion of you can see up there in that red red commercial area. You can see a little bit of the roundabout that's

246
01:13:16.159 --> 01:13:33.360
currently built. But more importantly, um the first exhibit that I'm going to be showing from the packet that was sent to the planning commission is the the binding concept plan which shows the building footprint of uh several commercial

247
01:13:33.360 --> 01:13:47.920
end users here as well as the existing transportation infrastructure. And as I move forward, what what really gives the the binding concept plan color both literally and figuratively in this case is the binding

248
01:13:47.920 --> 01:14:04.480
connectivity plan which is now shown in the slides and the applicant does have um a print out of the new connectivity plan. This was revised this morning as um the applicant continued to have meeting with the surrounding neighbors. It's also been sent to the clerk's office.

249
01:14:04.480 --> 01:14:19.600
Each of the uh the color coordination that's occurring there is showing the existing or proposed widths of paths as well as pedestrian crosswalks and flashers throughout the site allowing the existing residents to be able to negate the existing infrastructure as

250
01:14:19.600 --> 01:14:36.719
well as um the newer infrastructure that's coming in in terms of the parking and access ways. It also shows the um signalization that is required of this project to the north which is that's a existing cattle ranch way in

251
01:14:36.719 --> 01:14:52.960
54. It's a requirement to be signalized as well as if you move over to the west that connection will be fulfilled by this obligation. Currently there's a little bit of a stub out there to 54 on Metal Way, but it doesn't fully connect to 54. This will become another secondary access point for this

252
01:14:52.960 --> 01:15:11.360
particular pot of development within the MPD. There is a also a binding material pallet which is a little bit unusual in an MPUD um where the applicant was wanting to commit to specific building

253
01:15:11.360 --> 01:15:28.719
materials for a unified pattern um between the different non-residential users that end up locating within this site and colllocating with one another that the that the themes are are matching. Secondly, there is a binding exterior

254
01:15:28.719 --> 01:15:45.199
landscape plan. And I'm going to click through these slides rather quickly because there's quite a bit of information on all of these. This is the overall binding exterior landscape plan in which there's a key associated for the color which shows what the buffer

255
01:15:45.199 --> 01:16:01.760
is. So, as I move forward, it's now breaking down the individual colors into what they look like and the specific plant species width and typology that's associated with those buffers. This particular section here is showing the walls as well as the buffer that would

256
01:16:01.760 --> 01:16:20.320
be seen from the existing residential and how that relates to the scaling of the buildings that are being built within this impunity that abut the residential lots. As we move forward here, this shows the various buffers, both type A, B, and D2.

257
01:16:20.320 --> 01:16:35.920
And as I move forward here, um, which I failed to mention on the connectivity plan, the multi-use path along State Road 54 is also being improved with this proposal of the MPD. Uh you can see there that the trail kind of meanders,

258
01:16:35.920 --> 01:16:52.640
but the applicant worked extensively with the power company to make sure that they could fit an enhanced buffer um within the rideway and still not affect um the overhead power lines. This is an example of some of the uh the

259
01:16:52.640 --> 01:17:11.280
parking island buffering. And then as we move into the uh the perimeter buffering, the patio, the service screening and water management buffering again into the this is the walls and the intersectional nodes, particularly the roundabout, what the roundabout looks

260
01:17:11.280 --> 01:17:27.760
like and what it feels like from a pedestrian scale with these plantings. And uh with this binding um landscape plan, the two variations requested with this project from the

261
01:17:27.760 --> 01:17:45.199
code are both from that 9052 is specifically D5 and D4 which deals with the buffering requirements. And the reason that um the applicant is requesting these is that typically the when the preliminary site plans and the

262
01:17:45.199 --> 01:18:00.880
construction plans are submitted um the buffering and landscaping is done on a parcel by parcel basis. And what they've done here is um treat the development holistically with its buffering instead of waiting until site plan to treat these parcels

263
01:18:00.880 --> 01:18:16.560
one by one buffering uses from one another um just in compliance with the code. And given that PD was amanable to this request, I will also back up whenever I went to the uh the connectivity um portion. The other signal that's worth noting that isn't a

264
01:18:16.560 --> 01:18:32.000
developer obligation. The signal at Mitchell Ranch and 54 as well built runs north to south to Mitchell Ranch and then Mitchell Ranch connects to uh 54. That is in the county CIP. design is underway this year in fiscal year 26

265
01:18:32.000 --> 01:18:46.960
with construction expected to kick off in fiscal year 27. With that, it comes with a recommendation of approval with conditions from PTE and I'm available for any questions. >> All right. So, do we have any questions?

266
01:18:46.960 --> 01:19:02.000
Anything? >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Well, >> height, how are you? >> Hello, Barbara Wilhight. formally Barbara Wilhigh, 6327 Graham Boulevard, Newport Richie, Florida. Actually here

267
01:19:02.000 --> 01:19:18.400
for an applicant. Um, wow. I those presentations are getting better and better. I I shouldn't have woke it up at six o'clock this morning. Um, but I do have my own PowerPoint. I'll run through it. Um, a lot of what he was saying, I forgotten. We've been at this I've been working on this so

268
01:19:18.400 --> 01:19:37.360
long. We meet every Monday as a team and we obsess over every detail about this project. Um, and Mr. Vermillion remembers some of those details even more than I do. Approved versus proposed. I think Will went through this. Hotel is a permitted

269
01:19:37.360 --> 01:19:54.120
use. We were just trying to work the entitlements in a way that tried to make sense and make them clear. I know there's a lot of social media because I watch it um concern about a hotel that's already permitted use. It could be happen today on the property.

270
01:19:54.320 --> 01:20:11.679
the approved versus on the residential side there. You can have the loom allows unlimited exchanges from um commercial to residential and apartments. This this particular client, the applicant here has approvals for 684

271
01:20:11.679 --> 01:20:28.400
um can't read that that far. 684 five-story apartments at the moment. >> 64 >> 64. All right. Thank you guys. and uh this this but by what we're going to do is just just going to wipe all of the um residential entitlements out.

272
01:20:28.400 --> 01:20:45.679
What hasn't been used by this amendment, they're gone. The ability to convert commercial to additional residential apartments is gone. The ability to construct the apartments pursuant to the approvals the clients have are gone. Um so we've just been really trying to be thoughtful about how we move this

273
01:20:45.679 --> 01:21:01.679
forward in a specific manner. This is the buildout of this project. This is the end of Mitchell 54 West MPU. So we can when we do that we can be really we can clean up the paperwork. I would say that there are single family detached homes 240 that have been built and there have been town homes 422.

274
01:21:01.679 --> 01:21:16.960
Um also in Will's presentation as single family detached. A large portion of those town homes are owned by Invitation Homes. They are build for rent. Um they're rented along our southern boundary. They're all rented along our most of our west boundary, at least to

275
01:21:16.960 --> 01:21:35.120
the BJs. Their rent adjacency is is rental town homes. Thought Will did a great job of going over the infrastructure. Um, I would be redundant if I went through those three improvements there because he went over them with you. the mobility fees. Not

276
01:21:35.120 --> 01:21:52.080
only does the repayment of the 3.5 million for the TOD versus urban, and mind you, when they repay that, they repay that for all the LAR project, Bryant Square, every residential permit, and they're also repaying for every commercial permit in the um the Sprouts

277
01:21:52.080 --> 01:22:06.480
that commercial project to our west. Our estimated fees about 2.7 million for the project you see on the binding concept plan. Those are 2025 rates. Of course, your rates have gone up, so we'll see how that works out if it'll probably be

278
01:22:06.480 --> 01:22:24.480
more um effective uh July 1st. And then we also the developer had in in their economic development agreement the ability to get credits, mobility fee credits for the construction of what we call the internal spine road and that's legend pasture road and bear landings way. So I think if you look at the

279
01:22:24.480 --> 01:22:39.840
infrastructure it is significant because those are those are a traffic signal that when I go out there it's hard to get across that road. Three lanes of traffic and I can also tell you that our traffic signal is going to line up with Mrs.

280
01:22:39.840 --> 01:22:55.120
Spear's property. I know she has passed away recently. So we'll see what happens with that property but the infrastructure is going to be in there if that ends up being um developed in a different manner. So giving the residents more ways to get out, better ways to get out will be the

281
01:22:55.120 --> 01:23:11.120
b benefit of this project as well as giving the county some nice bit nice bit of mobility fees. Hopefully they can be used in this area. What comes to mind for me is Mitchell Boulevard extension. It's always been an issue how to get that done. This will give the county quite a bit of money. Um hopefully

282
01:23:11.120 --> 01:23:25.679
hopefully maybe that'll make that get that road done finally because that's a bypass to the little road 54 intersection. As Will had mentioned, we did quite a bit of work. We had a neighbor that collaborated with us on the binding

283
01:23:25.679 --> 01:23:42.480
connectivity plan. I didn't know, we've been representing this project for quite a while. Did not know that they had a quite a extensive trail system within this project, including looping around this project. Um, and it connects to the to the high school and the middle school, and it comes up and it goes

284
01:23:42.480 --> 01:23:59.199
around. And so, we really we hadn't had anything. We had a great connectivity plan based upon we looked at where there were gaps and where we could enhance just based upon our project. But one of the neighbors in Bryant Square owns one

285
01:23:59.199 --> 01:24:17.120
of the homes out there said you need to look at these issues relative to this trail and these driveways and the trail and connectivity and safe crossings of driveways. And so we did quite a bit. We added um the solar flashing beacons at eight crosswalks. We added at the our southern

286
01:24:17.120 --> 01:24:31.760
portion of our project where Home Depot has their southern driveway there. We have a no right turn. So, we limited that turn movement that goes down towards the residential portion of the project. Similarly, on the BJ side, we're we're limiting the left turn. Um,

287
01:24:31.760 --> 01:24:46.960
so that again there's no left turns. They'll go from the project down into the residential portion. We added trail stop signs so that the trail folks on the trail will know to stop at those driveways. Um

288
01:24:46.960 --> 01:25:04.960
this morning at 6:30 this morning, Joe Simone and Steve Henry and I decided that there was a five five foot existing sidewalk along the east side of Bear Landing Way. And we looked at that and we said, how can we make that an eight foot so that again the residents can

289
01:25:04.960 --> 01:25:21.040
have better ways to move around um as our project comes online. Our project was always anticipated to come online. You know, when if you look at a a project that's got 800 had 980,000 square feet of commercial approved, I don't think I'd represented a project that has that much. It was

290
01:25:21.040 --> 01:25:36.400
always anticipated that we'd be we'd be developing this property commercially. In any event, um so we thought that would be a good benefit and we were able to to fit eight feet. So we'll improve that sidewalk and and help uh people move around. We also had a added a

291
01:25:36.400 --> 01:25:52.719
lighting note to make sure there was special attention made to the driveways so that there's good lighting between the pedestrians that might use the trail in the evening or at sunset and the lights when they come on and other conditions of significance. Um

292
01:25:52.719 --> 01:26:10.320
we waved live local and all the binding plans that will went through and I had forgot about there's special condition number nine that we did um relative to what can we do with raw retail because we have some buildings that um we don't

293
01:26:10.320 --> 01:26:26.639
have end users for. So we actually limited we only can have one drive-thru. We have to have in our parcels G and F. The thought was on our end caps, let's make sure it's a place a place where you can go and and sit outside and eat. So, we actually have a condition that makes

294
01:26:26.639 --> 01:26:43.920
that happen. We we looked at the the two parcels. There's two parcels at Little Road and and Bearcat or Bear I'm going to mess up the name of that road. Um Bear Landing Way. These are the most interesting names that Mr. Dewey Mitchell put on this project. Huh. Um

295
01:26:43.920 --> 01:26:59.760
but there's two parcels, vacant parcels there on Little Road. We we have standards for those. can't can and can't do there either. So, I hope you can see the attention that's been put into this project to um to make it a good project and to fit well. It's been very

296
01:26:59.760 --> 01:27:17.360
thoughtful. Um and if you have any questions, my team is here. Joe Simino, Steve Henry, um we are here. So, >> just one question. Do you have end users for any of the out partials? >> We do. I'm only asking because um

297
01:27:17.360 --> 01:27:32.639
obviously BJ's and Home Depot aren't exactly the most you know not a lot of people walk to those uses. I mean those are tend to be more drive up >> you know put a bunch of goods in your car type uses.

298
01:27:32.639 --> 01:27:49.280
Do you do you have uses on do you have end users for the out parcels along 54 that are >> out parcel C and D? We have those end users. Are there plans in, Joe? >> Not they're not quite yet. They're not in yet. He's working on their plans. Um,

299
01:27:49.280 --> 01:28:04.400
and those are that's actually the form that you'll see with the little courtyard in the middle between the two. So that there's outdoor space. Um, so that form is there. Parcel A is a bank. C and D are restaurants.

300
01:28:04.400 --> 01:28:21.679
B and E are not decided yet. G and F not decided yet. I I did want to say one thing with regard to the landscape plan and I thought Will presented it pretty well. When you look at the the neighboring project and I go over there and shop every once in a while and if you park here and you need to go there

301
01:28:21.679 --> 01:28:37.760
because it was different parcels when they were developed there's this raised landscaping island and so I got to go from here to there I got to go through it with my heels because I always wear heels and so I made this team. I said, "I want to have a a landscape buffer that's a Barbara Willilhight landscape

302
01:28:37.760 --> 01:28:54.400
buffer that I will not have to go in my heels." So, we have one and it's actually it's the one that goes north south between BJ's and Home Depot. It's going to have a nice sidewalk. You can't see all these details, but this kind of details we did with the team and they were very generous to to make sure that

303
01:28:54.400 --> 01:29:09.679
I could walk through my heels and and go really. So that's the kind of detail that we went to with this to make sure it's walkable. Even if you know because you may walk from Home Depot, I probably would to BJ's and so I'll be able to walk on a nice sidewalk and won't have

304
01:29:09.679 --> 01:29:33.360
to mess up my heels. >> But C and D are more sitown restaurants that people would actually walk to. >> Yes, C and D are sit down restaurants. Yes. Okay. >> Anything else, Barbara? No. >> No. Any questions from up here?

305
01:29:33.360 --> 01:29:50.520
All right. We have anybody on on the schedule to speak here on this? >> The only individual I have signed up for public comment, Mr. Chair, is a Miss Bridget G. Okay.

306
01:29:55.440 --> 01:30:12.000
Good afternoon. I don't know why PL is blow. >> That's okay. Just take a deep breath. Take a deep breath. Okay. First, tell us your name. Your >> Bridget Gillio. I live at 8322 Corner Pine Way. You put Richie in Brian

307
01:30:12.000 --> 01:30:29.360
Square. Um I oppose this um file. This amendment removes the transitoriented design and trip reduction measures required in the original approval. The reality that means no transit lanes, no pedestrian connectivity and no ride

308
01:30:29.360 --> 01:30:45.600
share controls. It strips away all promise traffic mitigation. The big box impact we are being told BJ's Wholesale Club and Home Depot will be added as well. These massive anchors generate heavy continuous commercial and consumer

309
01:30:45.600 --> 01:31:02.639
traffic all day long. Having these big box stores will not look aesthetically pleasing to homeowners, especially the town houses that face back to the area. The hotel bottleneck layering a 240 room hotel on top of BJ's and Home Depot with

310
01:31:02.639 --> 01:31:17.760
morning departures, afternoon check-ins, and non-stop Uber loops will completely paralyze State 54 and Little Road. There's a roundabout hazard. We have a roundabout, but seeing the driving skills of many motorists, it can already

311
01:31:17.760 --> 01:31:33.440
be deemed as dangerous. People already have driven across the roundabouts rather than going around it, knocking over signs. Mixing big box retails and high volume hotel traffic without already unstable high-colision roundabouts guarantees daily gridlock

312
01:31:33.440 --> 01:31:48.639
and slows emergency response times. The environmental crisis. This adds an environmental crisis disruption to our local wetlands. It's immediate. It's pushing alligators into our residential areas, destroying sandill crane nesting

313
01:31:48.639 --> 01:32:06.239
grounds, forcing wildlife onto roadways and onto our driveways. We walked outside, there was an alligator under our car. The infrastructure deficit, our utilities, roads, and public services are maxed out. We cannot absorb this massive commercial hub while eliminating

314
01:32:06.239 --> 01:32:21.040
required protections. Allowing developers to secure approvals with safety safe guards only to erase them later said to dangerous precedents. Traffic with the schools are also problematic. Some residents already on

315
01:32:21.040 --> 01:32:37.920
the Bryant Square Facebook page are having issues with people crossing. And what they're saying is let's block the crossroads, the the three streets, but that's against the law. Parking overload neighborhoods. Parking is already a nightmare. The HOA tells us there's one

316
01:32:37.920 --> 01:32:55.040
time there's a certain time we cannot park. But then Pasco County ordinance says there's another. So parking tickets has been um arise. So you guys are getting money. And then for the protection of our roads, our environment, our public safety, I respectfully request to deny this

317
01:32:55.040 --> 01:33:10.920
modification. Um one of the concerns is that many of the homes are invitation homes. So how many residents versus uh tenants? Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much for speaking.

318
01:33:11.679 --> 01:33:29.199
And there's no one else then. Miss Will High, would you like to come up and answer some of those questions? >> Absolutely. Barbara Wilhight. Uh for the applicant. So the least the what we definitely are doing is stripping away. We are adding a lot of the because we

319
01:33:29.199 --> 01:33:45.520
entitled this property originally. I didn't entitle it actually. Um it was entitled by somebody else. But when it was entitled for 980,000 square feet of commercial, there was a lot of there's a lot of requirements and um those requirements aren't going away even though we're developing less here.

320
01:33:45.520 --> 01:34:02.400
We took very carefully looked at the connectivity as I mentioned and what Mr. Vermillion mentioned. We looked at everything, what's been constructed, what gaps are miss, what what's missing. Then we even went even further working with our neighbor to make sure we addressed um interactions between

321
01:34:02.400 --> 01:34:18.239
pedestrians and vehicles. Transit still like it was on the original plans and those locations. Um I know you heard about the town homes. A lot of those are actually a mult mo mostly multif family at least a portion of them to our south and to our

322
01:34:18.239 --> 01:34:33.600
west are really more of a multif family use as as rentals. The hotel location because it's a lot of I watch social media. We have a binding concept plan. So the hotel is not going here within this area because we have what exactly

323
01:34:33.600 --> 01:34:51.120
what's going to go here is on this plan. If there's ever a hotel it would be on the parcels um the vacant parcels on Little Road. if there's ever one um roundabout. We are uh if you look at the landscape plan, we have extensive landscaping um proposed in those areas.

324
01:34:51.120 --> 01:35:07.280
So, I think that'll be an enhancement to what they see today. As far as environmental goes, this property was massgraded years ago. A lot of this infrastructure is already in. It's kind of just a hole in the donut and finishing the project. But, um Mr. Mr. Simino reminded me that the county does still require and I guess the state

325
01:35:07.280 --> 01:35:22.480
requires you go back through the gopher tortoise so that if gopher tortoises decide to move in after the mass grading you still have to look for those and mitigate them by removal if they exist. So it's it's an amendment um to a plan

326
01:35:22.480 --> 01:35:37.120
that's already been in place. I know sometimes residents don't know those kind of details but you know this has been approved for commercial use and a and a pretty large commercial use for a large time a long time. So, thank you. >> All right. Thank you very much.

327
01:35:37.120 --> 01:35:53.120
Uh, all right. Any questions, discussion? >> We need to receive and file the >> All right. So, I hear a motion to receive and file the uh stuff that we were given earlier. >> Second.

328
01:35:53.120 --> 01:36:10.239
>> Okay. Any further discussion? All in favor? I >> I like sign. >> All right. received in the file. Is there a motion on this application? >> I actually would like to before you make a motion to move and approve. Um

329
01:36:10.239 --> 01:36:26.400
just note that there is a school to the south of here. There are two schools actually. Um and for somebody who lives in this area 5 minutes down the road who frequently weekly attend visits that shopping plaza. There are a lot of kids out there that are on ebikes and e- scooters coming in and out going to that

330
01:36:26.400 --> 01:36:43.520
plaza. I have a feeling they're going to be doing the same for this. So, I really appreciate um having all those flashers in there for those kids. Matter of fact, I would imagine after school gets out, those kids now start going through that way to that um plaza after school. So,

331
01:36:43.520 --> 01:36:58.320
um I really appreciate all the connectivity that's in this binding connectivity plan um and those splashers. So, I just want to note that um for somebody from the school district perspective, but also for somebody who frequently visits this and sees those

332
01:36:58.320 --> 01:37:15.600
kids there. >> All right. >> All right. A motion. Second. >> I'll second. >> Approve item P5. >> I'll second. >> A motion and a second. Is there any further discussion on the motion? >> I I just like to add that I mean I'm

333
01:37:15.600 --> 01:37:30.719
appreciative for all the attention to detail and all the things that were added to this plan. I think that it's added a lot of value to and and a lot of the perceived probably problems with the big box with all the provisions and all the landscape requirements and all of the architectural type things that are

334
01:37:30.719 --> 01:37:45.119
included in here. I think that they've gone above and beyond what we normally see. >> I agree. >> Yeah. And much better than what was originally planned for that site. And when I drive by that site every day

335
01:37:45.119 --> 01:38:01.440
right now, I think how ugly it looks, you know? just cleared desert and uh I think this will be a big enhancement to that area. So So uh all in favor >> I

336
01:38:01.440 --> 01:39:00.760
>> I like sign. >> Okay, motion carries. >> Okay, we're going to take a a little bit of recess 10 minute recess back. We still got a comp plan work to do. Oh, I I agree.

337
01:39:23.600 --> 01:39:53.239
Well, >> that just tells me there's a problem. There's either a training problem or maybe that maybe the zoning reviews need to happen on in this building. I I agree. That's what I'm saying. I And I just thought it was Disney.

338
01:39:56.320 --> 01:41:33.960
>> So, >> now the tough one. All right. Well, they're meeting. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah, Well, it wasn't >> I think Here's

339
01:41:44.719 --> 01:43:29.800
my question. Do you want to know what She's like class done. You should hear some responsive document. She's probably just saying you're smart enough to start Excuse

340
01:43:30.080 --> 01:45:57.080
me. That's why >> we don't have a See this last Anyway, >> well, no. Just start teacher. I might feel like

341
01:46:08.080 --> 01:49:12.280
Wherever you sir. So, it's a six day The only take a look. Stop it. That was the most impressive What the hell? No. That's how we came up.

342
01:49:30.320 --> 01:51:28.520
Oh my god. But the roundabout Just cross. Nope. I'm not Joe. I do not play. Yeah. >> Have you spoken to Denise? >> Um Costco.

343
01:51:31.040 --> 01:51:46.320
>> That's where it's the one I stopped at when the way home. >> I had I had You know what? I wasn't sure it was you at first. I'm so used to you being >> I had I had like like I went in for one

344
01:51:46.320 --> 01:52:02.880
thing walking out. I did not. >> I was walking by and I think I walked right past you and I didn't like I didn't do a double check. I was like, is that just David? >> And I didn't want to come stock you down with things in my hand like David. >> It might have been after my doctor's

345
01:52:02.880 --> 01:52:22.320
appointment so I probably didn't have a suit on. >> You did. You did not have a suit on because that's what made me think. I was like, >> that would have been one of the few times I didn't have one on. >> I thought you slept in it. I see him walking through Long Lake in a

346
01:52:22.320 --> 01:52:50.159
suit. I don't know. Rides his bicycle in >> at the pool. >> It would have been miserable yesterday. We had the ribbon cutting for steps to recovery and we're all out there in suits and it's literally 95° out.

347
01:52:50.159 --> 01:53:07.040
>> No shade, right? Yeah. >> Where is that? >> Huh? >> Where was that? >> Trouble. It's on Trouble Creek Road. You sold the property. >> Oh, yeah. Okay. That's right. >> On Trouble Creek right there by just to

348
01:53:07.040 --> 01:53:28.639
the west of Madison Street. Yeah, >> I know exactly right. >> North side. >> Yeah, you did a lot of work on that land. >> I worked on that for 5 years. >> Did you really? >> Yeah. >> That was right across from one of my

349
01:53:28.639 --> 01:53:54.719
grandmother's houses >> when I was little. Oh. the orange groves all over there. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> That's all there used to be. >> Yeah. But my coach would have me run through those groves from Golf Eye, the

350
01:53:54.719 --> 01:54:30.080
old Golf Eye to 54 back, >> you know, >> and half the time I was carried in Gallagher. >> I was actually confused. I went to go. >> He was a late A tech do that now. >> Yep. My school bus route used to come up little road and remember where the big

351
01:54:30.080 --> 01:54:45.360
where Lowe's is? Where the big curve was? >> Oh yeah. Ed man's curve. >> Nothing but orange trees. >> But boy, when you drove through there in March, >> nothing but orange >> everywhere.

352
01:54:45.360 --> 01:55:05.520
>> I love that smell. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> Same thing when you drive up 19 where Embassy Hills and Regency Park was. >> Nothing but oranges. >> Yeah. >> Yes. What you asking? >> Good. We know our mics are on.

353
01:55:05.520 --> 01:56:02.679
>> Oh, >> we don't have any secrets up here. Everybody, >> everybody back needs to be here. We are back. >> Okay. >> We have what the staff necessary. So, >> all right.

354
01:56:03.679 --> 01:56:18.880
>> I'll bring back to order. >> Uh, good afternoon planning commission GA. It is the next item on the agenda is item PC6. It's PT 267596, a zoning amendment in the name of Denton Aav MPUD and Denton A Project LLC. It's

355
01:56:18.880 --> 01:56:33.840
a resoning request from AC Agricultural District, MPD master plan unit development district to allow for the development of 832 single family detached units, 75,000 ft of support commercial, and 440,000 square ft of light industrial and associated

356
01:56:33.840 --> 01:56:48.239
infrastructure located in northeast Pasco County, approximately 1.5 miles east of the intersection of Denton Avenue and Little Road, containing approximately three 331.6 acres. presented by staff.

357
01:56:48.239 --> 01:57:08.639
>> All right. Thank you. >> I just want to note before Will starts that I have an exparte um communication um with the applicant and I'll be submitting the form. >> Thank you. >> William Vermillion, Planning,

358
01:57:08.639 --> 01:57:26.639
Development, Economic Growth. Um, there were some other expartes for planning commission members that were also submitted to the clerk's office after the publication. This is the Denton Avenue MPD back before the planning commission continued um at the last Newport Richie hearing in

359
01:57:26.639 --> 01:57:45.520
April PTE 267597. And to to make this a little bit more brief, since I know there's a lot of people here to speak, I'm going to try to touch on the the revisions from last planning commission instead of hitting you guys with the same details. Uh the location map within the county, the

360
01:57:45.520 --> 01:58:00.320
request and the acreage from the applicant uh remains the same with the 832 single family detached units, 75,000 square ft of commercial, 440,000 ft of light industrial, and roughly 331.68 6

361
01:58:00.320 --> 01:58:15.840
acres. This is on the south side of Denton Avenue just north of Kitten Trail. And the the county engineer when he was briefly here for a couple minutes um back during the uh that Uklitian resoning, he was kind enough to remind

362
01:58:15.840 --> 01:58:34.960
me that Kitten Trail um is being removed from the county's vision road map. Right. Here's the location map, the little tooth of the property down to Kitten Trail, the existing zoning of AC and AR

363
01:58:34.960 --> 01:58:51.199
residential six and IIL future land use with uh some small pockets of RES 3 on the teeth of the property there on the southern boundary. the overall contextual map here um showing the proximity to the park,

364
01:58:51.199 --> 01:59:08.719
showing the Bolton Avenue extension and the existing uh Denton Place MPD, but more importantly the the revisions post planning commission in April. Uh the first of which of these revisions was to add an enhanced pedestrian crossing at

365
01:59:08.719 --> 01:59:25.679
Kitten Trail. Last time the residents spoke about um the difficulty there would be in getting from the pathway that the applicant is building to that in that little pocket park in between the residential to the sidewalk that exists on the south side. >> Could you put the aerial up there so

366
01:59:25.679 --> 01:59:41.440
that we can just see it as a reference? >> Actually, it might be easier if I go to the binding concept plan. >> Okay. So, that that little uh that southern pocket park there, that's the the multi-use path, that red dotted line, the 10 foot multi-use path. Okay.

367
01:59:41.440 --> 01:59:58.080
>> Some of the residents last time um had concerns about how you would get from the end of that to the actual infrastructure being built in Kitten Trail, adding the pedestrian crossing and flashers there on Kitten Trail for people to be able to cross. So, >> there's no mo automobile traffic going

368
01:59:58.080 --> 02:00:14.080
across there? >> No, sir. >> Okay. >> None. None. none north to south from Kitten into Denton. >> Right. >> Um the second thing that happened on the southern side and it will be reflected, it's both reflected on this plan set as well as the binding exterior exterior

369
02:00:14.080 --> 02:00:28.719
landscape plan was the southern buffer along Kitten Trail was increased from 20 ft to 40 feet along the backside of the 70ft lots that exist on the binding concept plan in orange. Um this was done

370
02:00:28.719 --> 02:00:45.199
in particular um about a year ago. There was an MPUD called the Hudson Family Trail um which had similar lot sizes and was actually within a rural character area within Pasco County. And both the planning commission and the board and planning development economic growth

371
02:00:45.199 --> 02:01:02.000
staff found that those lots were consistent with the rural area with the inclusion of this 40 foot buffer which is why the 40 foot number was chosen instead of the 20. So, do I am I understanding that this is going to be sort of heavily

372
02:01:02.000 --> 02:01:19.920
uh forested so that that 40 foot buffer is difficult to see through? >> Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And then the the applicant does have the uh these illustrations of what the buffer would look like at mature stages

373
02:01:19.920 --> 02:01:35.920
as well as the uh the exterior pallet. But if I move back, >> do we have a view of what the buffer will look like at the immature stage? >> I believe the uh the applicant they had provided renderings a part of the landscaping exhibit package. I just didn't put them onto the slide to avoid

374
02:01:35.920 --> 02:01:52.239
six slides of uh landscaping. So I did include that in the packet to the planning commission where they show renderings from the town. >> I think that >> you have one because I >> I do. It's on the Oh, well, there's Miss Patty. She's

375
02:01:52.239 --> 02:02:07.360
walking up. Hopefully, she can throw that up there for me. >> Uh, so if you go into the agenda package, my attachment that's on their binding landscape plan, if you download that and then scroll through a couple times, there's a a rendering that almost

376
02:02:07.360 --> 02:02:23.040
kind of looks like a drone shot that I think would be be easier to show. And then while while Patty's doing that, the last thing we did was there was some uh concerns um about data centers being a part of that industrial area. So data centers are now a prohibited use within

377
02:02:23.040 --> 02:02:40.000
the industrial area as a part of this MPUD. And of course all this was reflected on both the binding con or both the binding concept plan, the binding exterior landscape plan and the master plan. The sidewalk extension exhibit still

378
02:02:40.000 --> 02:02:58.119
exists as it was presented last time with the applicant constructing the sidewalk on the northern side of Denton Avenue to facilitate pedestrian traffic to the existing Arthur Engle Park. And I will I'll hold there until

379
02:03:39.280 --> 02:03:54.800
And before this comes up, I think I'd like to correct myself a little bit. It might not show exactly what the trees look like at their most immature, which I think was the root of your question, but it does go to show a different perspective of the buffer in

380
02:03:54.800 --> 02:04:49.880
terms of a the elevation and renderings and scale. I'm going to sweat through my suit up here. >> Any joke? >> I don't know. I got to have to Somebody bring me a napkin. Should be the last page.

381
02:04:51.840 --> 02:05:13.480
Okay, the PDF is loading tremendously. There we go. >> Okay. Oh, actually it does. It shows at installation and at maturity in the top left there at installation and then at maturity in the top right.

382
02:05:18.639 --> 02:05:40.560
So they're all mostly you know typical Florida vegetation. >> It's all Florida n all Florida native is the uh the binding landscape as a part of this MPV. >> Yeah, we've seen a lot of uh developments that have gone in. and they

383
02:05:40.560 --> 02:05:56.960
have uh you know two foot high plants and you know that's not going to be very helpful. So this is much better. And my um the last thing uh on the staff presentation for me to get through is the the variation requests. Um they're

384
02:05:56.960 --> 02:06:14.239
the same as the last time, but I'm going to go through these again. Um the first being from 901611 street design and dedication requirements. That is for the variation for the southern access point um which would have been to Kitten Trail. Um that did not change. Um Kitten

385
02:06:14.239 --> 02:06:30.239
Trail um lies to the south. The applicant opted not to put any vehicular trips onto Kitten Trail and provide two access places to Denton Avenue which is consistent with table 901 3A of the land development code. And

386
02:06:30.239 --> 02:06:47.280
then from 8056, the restrictions on post-development wetlands and upper upland buffering. The applicant requests that the non-residential um parcels be under single ownership. They're not required to create the mandatory association for maintenance.

387
02:06:47.280 --> 02:07:05.599
This comes with a recommendation of approval to the board of county commissioners and I'm available for questions. >> Okay. Do we have any questions for William? I appreciate it. >> Off the hook. Easy.

388
02:07:05.599 --> 02:07:28.239
>> Okay. Is the applicant present? >> Good afternoon again. Barbara Bheight 6327 Grand Boulevard for the applicant. Going to just briefly go through a few things that were in my prior PowerPoint because it's been a month. Um, but try not to spend too much time on them because I know we want to talk about

389
02:07:28.239 --> 02:07:44.560
other things. For our application, again, we're we're following the comprehensive plan that the board set on this property. 86 32 single family detached homes, 60 70 foot lots along the perimeter. No 40s, no apartments, no towns, no villas, none of those things.

390
02:07:44.560 --> 02:07:59.280
One of the questions that came up uh during public comment uh the first time was about blending of density. We went back and checked our plan in the res 3 acreage. Our units are 20 2.5 units per acre in the res 3 area of the property

391
02:07:59.280 --> 02:08:14.639
and the res six acreage we have 3.4 units per acre. And yes, Mr. Moody, we took out the industrial. I did make a mistake when I did that calculation for you last time. The current lax land use designations allow maximum 462 homes

392
02:08:14.639 --> 02:08:30.239
versus the 832 that we're we are um requesting. That is significant because you're I'm asked what have you doing? How are you being considerate? How are you working with your surroundings? That's what we're doing. We do this is many layer things that we did here to be

393
02:08:30.239 --> 02:08:45.920
very thoughtful. But one of the thing was things was not seeking 1462 um dwelling units even though that's what the land use would allow. We have the advanced um landscaping plan. See if there's anything interesting here

394
02:08:45.920 --> 02:09:02.639
that that um will hasn't already gone over. Changes made during neighborhood meeting. We did have neighborhood meetings. We had four of those as we'll recall we after the neighborhood meetings or during them we did the grading plan. I mean I think when we're asking about that landscaping what's really significant is here is we are

395
02:09:02.639 --> 02:09:19.679
required to keep along our perimeter all of the existing vegetation that exists today. And then we are mandating requiring that we actually enhance that landscaping along our adjacencies. What we're required to do is a type A buffer.

396
02:09:19.679 --> 02:09:35.679
the most minimal buffer there is in the code, which is where the code's saying that our use and the adjacent uses are compatible with a type A buffer, but we didn't even do a type B buffer. We did a type B buffer on steroids because a

397
02:09:35.679 --> 02:09:54.000
we're going to keep all the existing legislation because we did the grading plan. The client spent the money and the time to do that. he knows that he doesn't need to grade to the property line and he can keep the grading out of these buffers and keep the natural vegetation in there and then supplement that vegetation um and plantings.

398
02:09:54.000 --> 02:10:10.639
We worked hard on the conditions regarding that passive park on the south side. We had a lot of requests, you know, when we talked to our neighbors and and Robert Melson, representative of the property, actually met with them in their homes about what could go on in that park and what couldn't. They wanted to stay natural. They wanted to stay the

399
02:10:10.639 --> 02:10:27.239
vegetation to stay like it was is today. And they wanted no um they wanted everything passive, nothing active. And so basically what we're going to do down in there is keep it natural and and meander our our trail down there to Kitten.

400
02:10:27.760 --> 02:10:44.560
We changed the Kitten trail lots. When we went into the neighborhood meetings, they were 60 foot lots coming out of the neighborhood meetings. Again, we're trying to work and and and it's a balance here between the property owners that live out there and this property's rights as well. The other thing that we did during the neighborhood meetings is

401
02:10:44.560 --> 02:11:01.440
the client agreed to single story homes along the perimeter. So, the question did come up about landscaping when it's put in, landscaping at maturity. Well, another thing that we did was limited to one-story homes. This is just to show where that passive

402
02:11:01.440 --> 02:11:19.840
park is. a lot of detail in the con in the conditions of approval about what can can and can't happen there as a result of our direct conversations with our neighbors. Nothing here that you haven't already heard, just the changes we made after neighborhood meetings.

403
02:11:19.840 --> 02:11:35.920
Um Will showed you the off-site path again being what we're trying to do is look at what's going on around us. That's an a significant improvement because right now the folks in summer chase if they want to walk to the park they walk along their front edge in a sidewalk on a sidewalk and then they

404
02:11:35.920 --> 02:11:51.920
walk in the dirt to get to the park. Same thing Denton Place folks they'll walk in the dirt until they get to our new sidewalk and then they'll be able to pick up our sidewalk because that project wasn't required to do anything and didn't agree to do anything. So those folks will walk in the dirt until they get to our sidewalk that we're

405
02:11:51.920 --> 02:12:08.560
doing. They'll take them all the way to the park. The other thing that's significant about that is that right now anybody that's on Kitten Trail that if they want to go to the park, there's no easy ingress inress to that park, they'll be able to come through our trail up our our multi-use path across

406
02:12:08.560 --> 02:12:24.239
Denton with an enhanced um safety crossing and to the park on a sidewalk all the way to the park. >> Nice to know. >> That's a significant change with pardon me. >> 10 foot wide sidewalk. >> 10. Yes. Yes,

407
02:12:24.239 --> 02:12:39.599
>> that's that's larger than usual, too. >> Yes. So, those are just things that we did again to be thoughtful of how we put this project together. We we know there was obviously concerns about it. So, those are just a highlight of what we did after the planning commission. We

408
02:12:39.599 --> 02:12:56.639
went at it again and and specifically what we did was I really felt like the question in the mind of the planning commission members, if I could crawl in your mind and based on what you said was compatibility. I told you about all the things we've done in this project and how this project's been thoughtfully laid out, but I didn't give you any

409
02:12:56.639 --> 02:13:11.440
context. How is it compatible? Why is it compatible? How does it compare to other projects? So what we did was we put together this consistency analysis, compatibility analysis, really looking at what does compatibility mean under

410
02:13:11.440 --> 02:13:27.679
the code and looking at other projects because I think the best you you can do to determine what's compatible is see what you all have recommended as compatible, what staff has recommended as compatible and what the boards found as compatible. So after doing that analysis of all these projects, that's

411
02:13:27.679 --> 02:13:44.400
what led us to what will explained to you was enhancing that buffer to 40 to 40 um feet along those Kitten Trail lots where there was just a lot of comments and a lot of concern from the Kitten Trail residents about lot compatibility. So we looked at Hudson Family Trail

412
02:13:44.400 --> 02:14:01.440
MPUD, which as Will explained is in the rural character area, and said, "Well, if this property or our neighboring property was in the rural character area, what could we do?" and to be compatible. Um, what more could we do to be compatible? And so we use that 40 feet. But in in Hudson Family Trail,

413
02:14:01.440 --> 02:14:17.760
that 40 feet is an undisturbed buffer. So it just stays like it is. We are undisturbed and enhanced and 40 feet. For example, when you have a type A buffer, no fence required. Our conditions require a fence.

414
02:14:17.760 --> 02:14:33.840
We um added the kitten trail bike pedestrian crossing, the enhanced crossing as requested by the planning commission. We updated our MPD plan. It wasn't very clear that we have two functional accesses to Denton. So, we just cleaned that up. We updated our um

415
02:14:33.840 --> 02:14:49.599
enhanced landscape plan and our binding concept plan to be consistent. And staff I has made the decision and we've advocated with this for a long time a actually on behalf of all these residents that kitten come off the vision road. We are the ones that are that put Bolton through our property.

416
02:14:49.599 --> 02:15:06.239
Not required because today it's not a vision road. Not required to dedicate any rightaway for that. Not required to put that bisecting our road. But we are the ones that started the Bolton should be the vision road. It's a more appropriate vision road. And we did that in our project and the staff has

417
02:15:06.239 --> 02:15:23.520
apparently looked at it as well and agree that Bolton should be the vision road and not kitten. long-term impact for those residents is that it'll no longer be when that's adopted by the board, it'll no longer be that that kitten is the future where where traffic is supposed to to be grow and more

418
02:15:23.520 --> 02:15:39.679
traffic and vision road standards and potentially improvements in the future. So, I'm glad what we started with regard to our project is now following through with the staff removing kitten from the vision road. With regard to the compatibility

419
02:15:39.679 --> 02:15:56.000
analysis that we did, a couple highlights of of this and um I made copies of it because I I thought it was just really good work and we printed out bigger copies of the of the plan so you could see. But when you look at the standard of what we have to do under the

420
02:15:56.000 --> 02:16:11.440
code to meet the criteria to be approved and recommended for approval, we have to demonstrate transi that we transition appropriately to adjacent lots or is what the code says. We effectively shield adjacent uses in the absence of

421
02:16:11.440 --> 02:16:27.920
lot or use compatibility. This code actually says that if even if we didn't achieve lot or use compatibility, as long as we effectively shielded adjacent uses, we get approved. But we didn't do that. We didn't look at the Denton Place and say, "Well, everybody recommended

422
02:16:27.920 --> 02:16:43.840
approval of Denton Place to our north and our west with 40 foot lots and a 15-oot type A buffer up against lots that are 5.8 acres, 2.89 acres. We didn't say, well, if that's what y'all approved as

423
02:16:43.840 --> 02:17:01.120
compatible, recommended approval is compatible, and the board approved, that's what we should only have to do." We're much more thoughtful than that. We were asked to be more thoughtful than that and we have been more thoughtful than that. 40 foot buffer enhanced buffer um as well as maintain the

424
02:17:01.120 --> 02:17:16.880
existing vegetation. So we achieved use compatibility because it's residential residential this whole all this analysis shows you that we're we're more than compatible on a lot on a lot basis. For example, Palm Wind MPUD, both the planning commission and the

425
02:17:16.880 --> 02:17:33.359
board found that 40 foot lots with a 10- foot code compliant type A buffer was compatible with a sevenacre adjacent lot, a 4acre adjacent lot, twoacre adjacent lots. Same thing with 50 foot lots. So that's why I wanted to lay this out because I really wanted to give you guys

426
02:17:33.359 --> 02:17:49.679
context of what does compatibility mean under the code? what is our requirement to to demonstrate to be found compatible and how we more than meet the requirements for compatibility under both your code and what's been approved as compatible. Um I think we've done a

427
02:17:49.679 --> 02:18:04.319
pretty good job of explaining our enhanced buffer if you have any questions regarding that. We certainly can go through that. You know where you normally would have one row of evergreen shrubs, we have two and they're six feet. We plant them at six feet. So, I mean, just again and again and again

428
02:18:04.319 --> 02:18:20.639
thoughtful presentation of how we bring those forward, brought this back to you all. Um, and trying to make sure you had the information that you needed to make a decision today. >> You have a or anything trail?

429
02:18:20.639 --> 02:18:39.599
>> We do. It's in It's in here. Yeah, it's um it's sheet number two on your bigger sheets. Should we do a motion to receive and file? >> Well, that would be fabulous. >> Motion to receive and file. >> Second.

430
02:18:39.599 --> 02:18:58.319
All >> in favor? >> I >> I >> and then within your Hudson Family Trails also within your consistency analogy compatibility act page. >> Is it possible to put this up on the

431
02:18:58.319 --> 02:20:09.040
screen? What page is it, Harvard? >> It's page nine of your consistent of the compatibility analysis. I see. While we're waiting for that to come up, I did want to mention that we also looked at Summerchase, which is to the

432
02:20:09.040 --> 02:20:26.000
north of side of Denton, just east of here. Summerchase is approved for it's an R4 zoning district, 60 foot lots. um were found consistent next to 12.2 12.92 acres, 6.51 acres

433
02:20:26.000 --> 02:20:44.160
right in this area because I do know some of the projects along Hudson is along Hudson. So I wanted to make sure that you could see what was approved along Denton in this area as well. >> Do we have an aerial photograph of Hudson Family Trail? >> Electronically, I guess you're looking for

434
02:20:44.160 --> 02:21:31.840
>> on the screen. >> It's on the screen. No, >> she's he's asking for it on the screen. >> On the screen. >> Pasco mapper. >> Yeah, you can get a Pasco mapper. How about that? No aerial of the property.

435
02:21:31.840 --> 02:21:52.479
>> You just want Pasco Mapper. It sounds like >> Yeah. >> Family trail and Hudson Avenue. >> Here, let me give you a parcel ID number. 27 2 4 1 7 0 0 1 0 0

436
02:21:52.479 --> 02:22:22.479
11 160. That's just a lot in that subdivision, but that'll get you there. Well, I'm not sure what's going on here, but point that I'm trying to make since we can't get a good aerial

437
02:22:22.479 --> 02:22:39.600
photograph. This is what the site looks like pre-developed. It's a forest. Okay. Undisturbed is I left the trees there. I didn't cut those trees down. I'm not supposed to cut those trees down. When I look at

438
02:22:39.600 --> 02:22:55.760
the applicant's property, there's no forest there to save. There's a difference, right? >> Mhm. >> There. This was supposed to be an undisturbed buffer. That's a forest. There's no trees there today on the applicant's property. So, it's

439
02:22:55.760 --> 02:23:10.479
undisturbed. What? I'm undisturbing a hayfield. >> Yeah. Right. >> And I'm going to plant a buffer of 2 in diameter trees and 18inch high bushes. >> And it'll take 20 or 30 years before

440
02:23:10.479 --> 02:23:28.319
that buffer is meaningful. That's the point I'm trying to get to. >> And that's why we exceeded we are not in the rural character area. And that's why we looked at other projects to make sure that we were exceeding what was found

441
02:23:28.319 --> 02:23:45.439
compatible. So again, if you look at Den Place on the north side of us, you've got 40 foot lots, 10 15 foot type A buffer. That's it. You look at you look at Summerchase, north side of Denton to our east, 60

442
02:23:45.439 --> 02:24:04.800
foot lots. >> I understand >> 15 20 foot buffer. So what we're doing is exceeding all of that. Palmlands, Sacklesen, they're all in there. We could have just brought you a Dent in Place project and said, you know, it was

443
02:24:04.800 --> 02:24:19.600
because Denton Place was approved. You all found it consistent, compatible. The board found it compatible. It's been approved. It's under construction. That's that's the standard we have to follow. But we didn't do that. >> Make it sound as if there's an automatic determination

444
02:24:19.600 --> 02:24:39.680
of compatibility. I would say if there was that we would have no need to be here having a public hearing. >> Well, I don't believe that to be the case. I think there's I think you have to show compatibility. But what I'm saying based upon my 32 years of doing

445
02:24:39.680 --> 02:24:56.240
this is that if it's if you can show what's been found to be compatible, the issue that we've been talking about is lot size to lot size. the concern of our lot sizes versus our neighbors lot sizes, existing homes and that's what

446
02:24:56.240 --> 02:25:12.080
the analysis looks at is what has been found compatible in similar situations. So to me that is how you determine compatibility and you do look at it and we've analyzed it and we've given you that information.

447
02:25:12.080 --> 02:25:32.240
>> Okay. I do have a question. Um, last time we were here last month, um, and Chris P and Derek Malands aren't here, but I remember when we were talking about the continuum. Um, there was conversation on

448
02:25:32.240 --> 02:25:48.960
emergency access. They understood that I won't put words in their mouth, but it might not be appropriate to have the full access on Kitten. I totally understand that but there was some discussion on having emergency access. I was wondering if there was further

449
02:25:48.960 --> 02:26:05.600
discussion on that or what thinking was. >> So we have not requested emergency access. It's it's up to because our meetings with our neighbors they asked us not to have any access other than bike ped. Um

450
02:26:05.600 --> 02:26:20.880
so we followed through with that. So we have requested a variation to not have any access. It's ultimately up to the planning commission what you want to recommend on that issue on the board. I can tell you when we did Sackleson it was the same issue and I looked back

451
02:26:20.880 --> 02:26:37.520
last night to remind myself of what happened on Sackle to Foxfire Drive back and forth back and forth back and forth. The board made sure there's no access ever to Foxfire Drive from Sackleson. So that's what they did from a policy standpoint when this issue presented them very similarly in Sacklesen on

452
02:26:37.520 --> 02:26:53.520
Foxfire to our project relative to Kitten. So we're going to follow whatever the board wants to do and whatever you all recommend only to the board. We're not going to make a change. If you recommend that, we're not going to make a change before the board because we're going to stay consistent with what we told those neighbors because there's neighbors that aren't

453
02:26:53.520 --> 02:27:09.840
here today that came to those neighbor meetings. So, we're going to stay consistent with what what we promised those neighbors. We've had plans with access, we've had plans with emergency access, we've had plans without. So, ultimately, it's a I I really see it's a policy decision for

454
02:27:09.840 --> 02:27:26.000
you all to make a recommendation on, for the board to make a decision on. >> I think it personally, I think it's a better decision to have a foot path or bicycle access onto kitten and keep them extra traffic off. I like

455
02:27:26.000 --> 02:27:43.040
the fact that you move the vision road north away from Kitten because I think Kitten should remain more of a rural road and I think that would be important if I lived in that area. The other thing I think we

456
02:27:43.040 --> 02:28:00.560
need to recall remember is that this property is was actually zoned for a lot more units than you're asking for >> the land use. Yes, the land use. Correct. >> Land use. So, um, and I know we're not required to give the maximum, but we're

457
02:28:00.560 --> 02:28:16.960
not given the maximums, but we are required to take into account people's property ownership rights. And so, you know, I think this is a much better plan than it came with last time. And, uh,

458
02:28:16.960 --> 02:28:33.520
uh, and I think it takes away some of the concerns that I would have if I lived on Kitten Trail. And that's that's what I try to do. I try to put myself in that in their situation. I also appreciate the fact that you're not going to have any two-story

459
02:28:33.520 --> 02:28:48.800
homes on the perimeter, so you don't feel like there's somebody looking down on on the home adjacent to your development. And that's that's come up a number of times in other applications. And I thought

460
02:28:48.800 --> 02:29:05.359
that was a great good consideration. So, um, uh, I'm I'm pleased sort of with what you've come up with. >> Thank you. >> Well, we'll, uh, if you have any more

461
02:29:05.359 --> 02:29:22.160
questions, happy to answer them. If not, we'll let the public speak and come back. >> I think my question might be for staff. Um, so I appreciate you putting the flashers on the south and I think you put it on the north as well. >> That's correct. >> I like that you did it on both. Um, but my question for staff, and I know this

462
02:29:22.160 --> 02:29:36.880
is how it was done in other MPUs, and I think maybe in my mind when I go to look for those flashers, I immediately go to the conditions of approval and they're on the master plan, but they're not necessarily on the binding plan. So, I think my question might be best for

463
02:29:36.880 --> 02:29:52.720
Patrick Dutter, but he's not here. Um, I just want to make sure that his team knows to look at those master plans or binding plans to know saying, "Hey, there's supposed to be flashers here." when it comes through site plan review. I think he I think him and his team know

464
02:29:52.720 --> 02:30:08.080
that and I think they're trained to look out for that. But David Engel, planning and economic development director, we do more than that. We have a tracking sheet on all our MPDs now that are shared with all stakeholders that do subsequent plan

465
02:30:08.080 --> 02:30:26.560
review or permitting. So, um, when an MPD is approved, we have a tracking document that Patrick's team receives with a checklist with all the obligations all laid out. >> Oh, thank you. >> Perfect. >> Nice. >> All right. Thank you.

466
02:30:26.560 --> 02:30:42.080
>> Okay. Yeah. Any other questions for height? >> No. Okay. All right. Um, you want to let me know who signed up to speak? >> Mr. Mr. Chair, the first individual I have for public comment is a Mr. Ken

467
02:30:42.080 --> 02:31:00.080
Howard and after that it'll be Martin D. >> Okay. The second person would like to come up closer to be ready. That'd be that's fine. >> Name's Ken Howard, address 1117 Kitten Trail, Hudson.

468
02:31:00.080 --> 02:31:18.399
My first uh concern is road safety. Denton Avenue traffic fatalities since 2019 is seven. Kitten Trail has nine fatalities from Hicks Road to Coyote Road. Long-term residents say there's more. Backup traffic is most likely to

469
02:31:18.399 --> 02:31:35.040
occur on Denton Avenue with the addition of,200 plus cars to it daily. The overflow will definitely come on to Kitten Trail, an already busy road with school traffic. of the nine fatalities on Kitten Trail. Let's not forget the school bus accident on Kitten where

470
02:31:35.040 --> 02:31:50.880
there were students that were injuries in 2019. As discussed, open Bolton Avenue for overflow. This will take most likely years from now. Traffic will be a mess and it will only be a small relief to a

471
02:31:50.880 --> 02:32:06.720
congested nightmare. We are looking at a small gesture of putting in crosswalk to to propose sidewalks. Some white paint on a road with flashing light is not going to make anyone any safer.

472
02:32:06.720 --> 02:32:22.880
Family trail is not affiliated with Hudson Family Trails. It is an access road from landlocked properties. Actually owned by an elderly lady in Tennessee. 24 foot wide, 419 yards long.

473
02:32:22.880 --> 02:32:40.319
No buffer for approximately 1,000 feet. Family trail. Three properties on the east of the trail. On the north of the development, only two properties for a total of five residents affected. Blackwell on the north is six

474
02:32:40.319 --> 02:32:55.359
properties, west seven properties, east three properties, all various acres. And on the south, four properties. All boundaries have heavy forest with no residents on four properties with a

475
02:32:55.359 --> 02:33:12.319
total of 20 properties affected. Summerchase on the south is Denton Avenue. East is light eight properties with Coyote Road separating them with a small buffer. North is four properties west of Pasco Park system. A total of 12

476
02:33:12.319 --> 02:33:29.680
properties all various acreage. Shackle and Huden Park. Buffer on the north of Huden Park. A buffer on the north is Hudson Avenue. East is Peach Tree Road, a subdivision in progress. South is five

477
02:33:29.680 --> 02:33:48.160
lots, various acres with four lots of eight acres, a total of nine residential properties. I they also go on with you know comparing um palm winds and uh Denton Place and Sage Brush which is 804 units

478
02:33:48.160 --> 02:34:04.000
are proposed. West five west is five properties with a 1312 foot of Pasco land. North is 11 properties plus a mobile home park and east is five properties for a total of 17 properties affected.

479
02:34:04.000 --> 02:34:22.319
Denton Avenue project. West is 874 yards of Pasco land, 11 residential acres. South is 14 residential acres. East is 10 residential acres plus undeveloped land of 39 acres. The difference is 35

480
02:34:22.319 --> 02:34:38.960
residential properties affected all various acres unlike summerchase of 12, Blackwell 20, family trail of five, palm winds of 16, Denton Place, Sagebrush of 17, the Shackleton and Shackleton of

481
02:34:38.960 --> 02:34:56.000
nine residential acres. The comparison of buffers with these properties is a long shot from what Kitten Trail properties have to offer. The commissioner who suggested 1acre tracks for Denton Avenue project has seen the value of the

482
02:34:56.000 --> 02:35:12.960
homes affected by the project with overdevelopment and housing with small 70 foot lot wide lots abuted to acorage and in the words his words estate style properties with this

483
02:35:12.960 --> 02:35:28.960
I still feel the project should be turned down the comparison properties with buffer are deceiving to compare with Denton Avenue project and surrounding properties. This is not usual and customary to existing properties. Thank you.

484
02:35:28.960 --> 02:35:45.200
>> Okay. Thank you. I I was able to give you extra time because I heard the buzzer go off. I was trying to be considerate of your presentation, but I'm going to have to try to keep everybody to their three minutes. So, >> I'll go shorter. >> Thank you very much.

485
02:35:45.200 --> 02:36:02.000
>> After Mr. Ken or excuse me after Mr. Martin D we have Mr. William Roberts. >> Good afternoon. My name is Martin Dolabach. I live at 15432 Dennis Drive Hudson, Florida, corner of Bolton and Dennis.

486
02:36:02.000 --> 02:36:16.800
The problem is I got with these people. Not that I disrespect them, but they're looking for everybody accommodate everybody down the road. What about the people surrounding that property? You're taking big pieces of property and

487
02:36:16.800 --> 02:36:33.600
throwing pebbles in the middle of it. And I'm sorry, we call stones, but the pebbles in the middle. That's what you're doing. I'm sorry about the property half mile down the road where there's barely anybody where you got less people coming in to eject. Um, I can't understand it. Same thing like he

488
02:36:33.600 --> 02:36:50.720
was mentioning, which I agree 100%. You guys offered something about one acre per house. Not only did they ignore you, they didn't say, "Hey, we're going to decline this or accept this or think about this." They flat out ignored it. And that's all I got to say. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you.

489
02:36:50.720 --> 02:37:10.560
>> After Mr. William Roberts, we have Miss Janet Carile. >> Good afternoon, members of the board and staff. My name is Bill Roberts. I reside at 12,700 Ithaca Avenue, Hudson 34667. I'm giving sworn testimony and thank you

490
02:37:10.560 --> 02:37:26.720
for this opportunity to speak. This is my first time ever doing this. I hope you give me a little latitude. I don't have all the technical stuff I think people have. >> Welcome to be here. >> I am here to oppose this zoning change in rural Pasco. Rural Pasco is disappearing piece by piece. Every

491
02:37:26.720 --> 02:37:43.520
reszoning may seem small on its own, but together they permanently transform agricultural and open land into dense urban development. Once the rural character is gone, it cannot be restored. Residents bought homes, farms, farms, and property in these rural areas with the understanding that the county

492
02:37:43.520 --> 02:37:58.960
intended to preserve lower density development, protect natural resources, and maintain compatibility with existing communities. This proposal would increase traffic on roads that are already strained, especially during evacuations, school

493
02:37:58.960 --> 02:38:16.399
hours, and peak commuting times. infrastructure in many rural parts of Pasco simply has not kept pace with growth growth. Uh approving more intensive development before roads, drainage, schools, and emergency services are adequate burdens existing residents and taxpayers. There

494
02:38:16.399 --> 02:38:32.560
are also environmental concerns. Rural lands provide wildlife habitat, groundwater recharge, flood storage, and tree canopy that help reduce heat and storm water impacts. Overdevelopment increases runoff and flooding risks, especially in a county already dealing with drainage problems and extreme

495
02:38:32.560 --> 02:38:49.120
weather events. In my opinion, the highest and best use of this tract is to preserve low density. Um, to be clear, I am not opposed to growth. I know Pasco County will continue to grow. My concern is density. Growth should occur where infrastructure

496
02:38:49.120 --> 02:39:04.160
already exists and where the future land use map and zoning were designed to accommodate it. Smart growth means respecting established planning principles instead of continually pushing suburban density further into rural communities. Developers often promise buffers,

497
02:39:04.160 --> 02:39:19.760
landscaping, and traffic improvements. But those measures do not replace the loss of rural character, open space, quiet, and quality of life that current residents value. And once resoning is approved, future boards have little ability to reverse the long-term consequences.

498
02:39:19.760 --> 02:39:35.760
The projects on the north side of Denton have already changed the character of the community by clear scraping those forests and using massive loads of fill. It's awful. As a native son of Florida, I have watched the growth in this state for a very long time. The land where I met Neil Armstrong while dove hunting is

499
02:39:35.760 --> 02:39:50.319
now tracked housing. I ask the commission to protect rural Pasco County and deny this zoning change to preserve the character of the community. Again, thank you. >> Thank you very much for coming. After Miss Janet Carlile, we have Karen

500
02:39:50.319 --> 02:40:10.240
Roberts. >> Good afternoon. My name is Janet Carile, 16108 Picket Lane, Hudson. Uh, I had a couple of key points. First of all, Summerchase, in my book, is not consistent with a rural area. Everybody out here, they all moved out into the

501
02:40:10.240 --> 02:40:27.120
country. They wanted country. They wanted acorage. They wanted land. They wanted peace. They wanted quiet. We are not going to have that if they're going to open it up and just let all these small property housing go in. Okay. Um

502
02:40:27.120 --> 02:40:44.560
we have already problems with wildlife movement. Um the more that you're developing out there, they've already put sage brush in. We're already seeing an increase in coyotes on the property, rattlesnakes. I don't expect to put my dog outside and have to worry about that. Um, policing,

503
02:40:44.560 --> 02:40:59.439
it's pretty much null and void out there. Um, we can't even get police out there to run traffic control when you got speeders. You hear the crotch rockets flying down Denton Avenue every morning and every evening. Um,

504
02:40:59.439 --> 02:41:15.200
and also my other concern is if when we are in a flooding and rainy seasons, that area that they're proposing to put all these homes does flood and it does flood over top of Denton Avenue. So, I'm assuming that

505
02:41:15.200 --> 02:41:30.000
drainage would have to be addressed with that point. If they build up the land, how does that change all of our flood zones? Are they going to make that? So now all of a sudden with those of us that are not in a flood zone are now going to be flooded every time we get a

506
02:41:30.000 --> 02:41:47.359
storm for runoff. Um our water quality, we're all on wells. How is that all going to affect us? Um there's just a lot of things that we all we all want to have a nice quiet peaceful area to live.

507
02:41:47.359 --> 02:42:03.359
That's why we moved out to these areas. So with that, I I I'm basically against all of this. I just want it to be country. I want it to be and stay rural. Thank you. >> Thank you.

508
02:42:03.359 --> 02:42:27.359
>> After Miss Karen Roberts is Miss Sue Bolton. >> Good afternoon. Good afternoon, board. My name is Karen Roberts. I am very humbled and also kind of disappointed to have to be here today. I live next door to my sister. I live at

509
02:42:27.359 --> 02:42:45.840
16126 Picket Lane in Hudson 34667 and I have lived out there for 20 years. I'm on acreage. I I'm looking at the maps that they they're showing us as far as where Bolton is going to take this brunt of all of this extra traffic. They

510
02:42:45.840 --> 02:43:02.560
don't even connect. Bolton and Denton and Kitten Trail, they don't connect. So, I don't see how that's gonna even happen. Denton Avenue right now might as well be I75.

511
02:43:02.560 --> 02:43:19.280
We have so much traffic, big huge trucks. I have gotten killed, almost gotten killed. I cannot tell you how many times trying to make a lefthand turn, crossing oncoming traffic when there's

512
02:43:19.280 --> 02:43:36.160
nobody coming, but I have to worry about somebody passing six cars behind me, coming into my lane as I am trying to cross into where I live. I am in agreeance with Mr. Roberts, who's not a relation, and everything

513
02:43:36.160 --> 02:43:52.240
that my sister has said, Miss Carile, um, I can't stress enough how we're taking away little by little our peace of mind, our structured values that we came here in Pasco County to live for

514
02:43:52.240 --> 02:44:08.640
and live with. I beg you, please do not pass this this ordinance to for these homes to go in here. We have eagles living over on that property. We have gopher turtles, all kinds of other types of animals. We also

515
02:44:08.640 --> 02:44:26.479
have a big huge spring in which the cows used to drink out of there when they lived there. They did reforestation. It all used to be pine trees. The people that lived there did that and then after years and years and years, they finally cut them down and reeded. Some of them

516
02:44:26.479 --> 02:44:52.080
did grow back, but not the majority. Um, I think they just didn't water it properly. But I just beg you, please do not pass this. Thank you. >> After Miss Sue Bolton is Miss Deborah V. >> My name is Sue Bolton. Um, I live at

517
02:44:52.080 --> 02:45:08.000
10923 Kitten Trail. Um, my biggest concerns are flooding. I am very low. In fact, Mr. Seol stated the last time that we had this meeting that

518
02:45:08.000 --> 02:45:23.920
I was very low. Uh, last week when we had rain, I had lakefront property pretty much. Um, I'm concerned about runoff as far as waters because I have a well.

519
02:45:23.920 --> 02:45:39.520
Um, another big concern of mine is uh the gopher tortoises. I have three acres and I have three turtles that live on my land and I have possums. I have the redheaded woodpeckers on my property.

520
02:45:39.520 --> 02:45:53.920
Where, you know, where are all these going to go when all of a sudden we have more traffic? which is another complaint because like the lady before me just said, I go to make a left turn into my driveway,

521
02:45:53.920 --> 02:46:10.800
which I'm one lot past Dennis Drive. I go to make a left-hand turn, which I've turned my turn signal on at Dennis Drive, and I have cars passing me going between my mailbox and my fence,

522
02:46:10.800 --> 02:46:25.120
you know, and nothing is done about the traffic out there. One day this summer, I saw bunch of kids running down Kitten Trail. I knew that it was the children from the

523
02:46:25.120 --> 02:46:42.160
um high school that were out running track. That's always been that way. They always ran down Kitten Trail, but the traffic has gotten so bad. I called a FR friend of mine that's a principal at one of the schools right there, and I said, "Danny, you've got to get these kids off

524
02:46:42.160 --> 02:46:57.680
of this road. they're, you know, we've already had a number of fatalities. These kids are going to get hurt. So, she called the high school. She's a principal at the middle school. She called the high school and they immediately went out and got them all. I

525
02:46:57.680 --> 02:47:15.800
mean, you know, so I guess those are my biggest concerns. Um, and I appreciate you guys listening to us. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. After Miss Deborah V is a Miss Tracy Love.

526
02:47:18.160 --> 02:47:34.640
>> And who's next after that? >> Deborah V. >> Deborah Lee. >> Deborah V. >> V. And who's who's next after Deb? >> Tracy Love after Deborah V. So if Tracy Love or excuse me, Deborah is not here,

527
02:47:34.640 --> 02:47:50.640
Tracy Love. It is after Tracy. >> There's more people that aren't signed up. >> Oh, >> yeah. I'm I'm actually Tracy Low. Okay. And I reside at 10408 Kitten Trail.

528
02:47:50.640 --> 02:48:06.000
First, I'd like to thank the county staff for always being available. The c this commission for your time and consideration. We are very grateful for reduction in density from 1614 residences to 832 residences. However, we also feel it's

529
02:48:06.000 --> 02:48:22.560
important to acknowledge that this reduction was not solely the result of voluntary actions by the developer. In May of 2022, the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council recommended halting the rapid conversion of commercial and industrial land to residential neighborhoods. As a result, the Denton

530
02:48:22.560 --> 02:48:40.640
Avenue MPUD abandoned its comprehensive plan amendment change and removed the proposed multif family dwelling units from the project. That be being said, we are deeply disappointed that the Denton Avenue MPUD application, which was continued on April 16th, 2026, failed to

531
02:48:40.640 --> 02:48:57.279
meaningfully address concerns raised both by this commission and the surrounding community. Specifically, we are disappointed about the applicant chose to not revise the perimeter lot sizes to the 1acre lots that were strongly encouraged during the previous hearing, leaving the project at a

532
02:48:57.279 --> 02:49:14.160
density of 3.4 dwelling units per acre. This raises an important question. Why would the applicant choose to disregard the recommendations and guidance provided by this commission? As our community expressed not only in April 2026 hearing, but also throughout 2022

533
02:49:14.160 --> 02:49:30.800
and during multiple neighborhood meetings, this development, even the proposed revisions remain incompatible with the surrounding area in the existing rural character of our community. In addition, our area already faces an overabundance of housing. Miss Wilhight herself illustrates this in the

534
02:49:30.800 --> 02:49:47.439
supplemental consistency analysis submitted on May 14, 2026. Our residents have already witnessed firsthand the impact rapid development has had on nearly nearby rural areas. All you have to do is drive down Hudson Avenue to see the damage that unchecked

535
02:49:47.439 --> 02:50:02.479
growth has caused to the rural character of this community. The requested resone resoning change does not reflect compatibility with the surrounding land uses, nor does it demonstrate that the applicant truly listened to the concerns of the neighboring residents or the

536
02:50:02.479 --> 02:50:19.040
recommendations made by this commission. The refusal to incorporate larger larger perimeter lots showing shows a lack of willingness to compromise or responsibly transition this project into the existing community. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that you deny this

537
02:50:19.040 --> 02:50:43.279
application. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. >> Okay, thank you. >> Up next is a Mr. Tim V and after that is Nola. Good afternoon board. Thank you for this time and this opportunity. Uh my name is

538
02:50:43.279 --> 02:51:00.640
Tim Vandenberg. I live on 11595 Kitten Trail in Hudson, Florida. Uh we have a little over 800 feet of property line sharing on the south uh eastern spur of this land development proposed

539
02:51:00.640 --> 02:51:17.120
uh which is we also have about just under 12 acres of property one of the largest that's affected by the uh development. Um in the last meeting as others said the exterior lots were proposed to be larger and blend more with the rural

540
02:51:17.120 --> 02:51:34.000
rural uh characteristics of the surrounding area. We are asking for the 1acre lots that were proposed by the board and sizes to match the community and surrounding as a minimum. Uh many including ourselves uh have large type animals including horses, donkeys, goats

541
02:51:34.000 --> 02:51:49.520
and maintain that rural lifestyle uh around this community. The impact of the surrounding infrastructure including roads, schools, utility, emergency services and more will be greatly impacted. We appreciate the efforts to increase the buffers and the natural barriers but wanted to emphasize

542
02:51:49.520 --> 02:52:04.319
maintaining this rural type of community in a way and a life that has been there for decades if not longer. We are also uh we also wanted to verify that only singlestory homes would be built on both the south share property line and the

543
02:52:04.319 --> 02:52:20.399
north sides of that spur. I understand that they're going to be on the uh property line, but I wanted to make sure it was also on the north side of that spur. Due to our elevated position and views, having a two-story residence in these areas would remove the privacy of

544
02:52:20.399 --> 02:52:36.080
theffect, you know, affected homeowners. And that would be for many years until that buffer matures naturally, which could be uh 5 to 20 years depending on the uh type of buffer. Thank you for

545
02:52:36.080 --> 02:52:56.960
your time and attention and hearing our community and concerns and I'm opposed to the current proposed plan. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> The last individual signed up to speak is a Miss Nola. Good afternoon, commissioners. I live at

546
02:52:56.960 --> 02:53:12.720
15700 Mattis Road. I'm directly across the street on a dirt road from this development. I have a 10 acre equin estate and I breed Palamino Foundation

547
02:53:12.720 --> 02:53:29.279
quarter horses. I don't think any >> before you go any further, could you just give us your name for the record because we're recording it all. >> Nola. >> Thank you, Nola. >> I'm really surprised that something like

548
02:53:29.279 --> 02:53:45.279
this would be going in in our little piece of heaven in this small corner of Pasco County. The reason I moved up here 20 years ago was it was close to the beach, the hospitals,

549
02:53:45.279 --> 02:54:02.240
uh the horseman's association, so my kids could have horses. The same with the other neighbors. All of the people on my street have 10 acre properties and no one has taken us into consideration.

550
02:54:02.240 --> 02:54:20.080
And here we are. There's the development in my front yard. And they give us 20 ft for a buffer. They're putting in all these houses in this beautiful agricultural large lot

551
02:54:20.080 --> 02:54:34.640
community all the way down Denton. They're two acres, acre and a half properties. We have that one little one over by the ballpark. I don't know how that was passed,

552
02:54:34.640 --> 02:54:50.800
but I'm just saying don't ruin this little piece of heaven that Pasco has left and this small corner of the community. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much.

553
02:54:50.800 --> 02:55:06.960
All right. Is that anybody else? >> There is nobody else signed up to speak, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Is there anybody that wants to speak that hasn't signed up to speak? Okay. Okay. If you please come forward and give us your name, your address, and have you been sworn?

554
02:55:06.960 --> 02:55:22.880
>> No, sir. I haven't been sworn in yet. >> Okay, let's get you sworn. >> You swear or from testimony you're about to give, is the truth still? >> Yes, ma'am. >> My name is Matthew Kurthers. Um, my family resides at uh 12224 Kitten Trail.

555
02:55:22.880 --> 02:55:38.399
Um, I've heard from a lot of folks here that have been here a long time, some that have been here for a short period of time. I'm a generational resident. Um, my children will be the fourth generation on that property. I am a sixth generation Floridaian. My children

556
02:55:38.399 --> 02:55:53.600
will be seventh. Um, we have sat by me specifically and my brothers and watched my parents and my grandparents struggle with their day-to-day activities living on Kitten Trail. The roads were lime rock. They

557
02:55:53.600 --> 02:56:09.840
were holes. other um residents in the area would have to come out and pull each other out from the roadways and whatnot. Um there was no real pavement um past Cobra Way coming back down that way and uh we

558
02:56:09.840 --> 02:56:25.920
just dealt with it. Um whenever the county decided to put in the refu center and put in the uh dump and whatnot, all of a sudden Hudson Avenue went through and Hudson Avenue got paved. Kitten Trail got paved the rest of the way down. And with that pavement came the

559
02:56:25.920 --> 02:56:42.240
heavy haul trucks, trash trucks, dump trucks, rock trucks, you name it, all coming down. Um, we dealt with that as well. Um, dealt with the new neighbors moving in. Didn't like how the area was set up, consistently having to deal with

560
02:56:42.240 --> 02:56:59.120
code enforcement coming out, cleaning up, doing whatever we had to do. We dealt with it. Um, now we have this big development knocking on our back door. We have all of these homes that want to be shoved down our throats. And like

561
02:56:59.120 --> 02:57:14.240
many of us have already stated, we have horses, we have chickens, we have goats, we have large parcels of property that we contain all this on this. This what you're proposing now is or what they're proposing now. This doesn't fit the

562
02:57:14.240 --> 02:57:31.840
criteria by any means. I'm 45 years old. I've lived for 45 years on that road. I have watched everything come down that road. And for once, I'm asking and coming a and on behalf of my family

563
02:57:31.840 --> 02:57:47.040
to ask, don't do this to us. Don't make us have to swallow this. We've endured a lot on that road. We have made do with what was given to us on that road, but please don't push this down our throat. Thank you.

564
02:57:47.040 --> 02:58:10.640
>> Thank you. >> Good afternoon. >> Afternoon. >> I have not been sworn in either. >> Okay, let's get you sworn. >> Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give? Is the truth still? >> Yes, absolutely. your name, please.

565
02:58:10.640 --> 02:58:28.560
>> My name is Skyler Tally. I live at 10929 Kitten Trail. I'm right at the southwest corner of this development. Um, first thing I want to say that I noticed actually today, Pasco County, open spaces, vibrant

566
02:58:28.560 --> 02:58:44.000
places. Seems like we're taking away a really large open space and crowding it significantly. Uh I mean this is one of many. It's not just one. We were mentioned there was what six other

567
02:58:44.000 --> 02:59:01.439
developments that this was compared with and those are all within few miles of my house. Seems like we're going to have to probably change that soon cuz the amount of open spaces are disappearing. I mean, vibrant places maybe seems like a lot of nice colors that they're putting in for

568
02:59:01.439 --> 02:59:18.080
all the pallets for these developments that are coming in, but not really having open spaces. Um, hold on. Another thing I wanted to mention that I heard him speaking about was the compatibility with similar

569
02:59:18.080 --> 02:59:35.200
developments and situations, but the development scale and the proportion in comparison to these other developments and what they're doing to try and or what they've been approved for is just night and day. I mean, the

570
02:59:35.200 --> 02:59:50.880
near developments pale in comparison. and they're overshadowed by the magnitude of the impact that this one is going to have on our community. Um, last time my comments were about the impact of the educational system because I believe and I believe everyone here

571
02:59:50.880 --> 03:00:07.359
would agree that as the current generation, we need to be good stewards and preserve what we have in our community for the future generations to come. This is going to change the community and this entire area. It's going to change the developments that

572
03:00:07.359 --> 03:00:22.800
are going in are already changing it, but this impact is going to turn it into a suburban area. It is going to change it from what it is now. And most likely the people who have been in this community for a long period of time are

573
03:00:22.800 --> 03:00:37.680
going to see the effects of these new neighbors that aren't trying to move into a rural area that aren't trying to go and have horses, have goats, have chickens shoot their guns in their yards, which they have the right to do

574
03:00:37.680 --> 03:00:53.040
so. It's going to cause a lot of issues that as the time comes. And the other big thing to me is the water supply. I understand that they're going to be having new pipes laid in. They're

575
03:00:53.040 --> 03:01:10.080
not nobody's going to be on wells. Last time that that happened in nearby communities by us, uh the county came in and everybody had to sign off on taking county water and paying another bill and not having their well anymore. We mentioned last time about where is the

576
03:01:10.080 --> 03:01:26.000
water coming from when we were in a severe drought. The water's coming from far, far, far away from our lots. So, we're going to be piping all of that to where we're at. They're going to try and take us off our well water, which is actually helping with the droughts

577
03:01:26.000 --> 03:01:41.840
because we're taking from an area that has trees, has canopy, has grass, has the things to be able to supplement that water supply instead of trying to take it from an area that we've piped down to and go through more drought issues. as

578
03:01:41.840 --> 03:02:13.120
I'm being from California, I've seen that a lot. >> Thank you so much for your time. >> All right. Thank you. >> So, is there anyone else? >> I'm not sworn in either. Should we maybe ask if there's anybody else who

579
03:02:13.120 --> 03:02:30.479
think they may provide public comment also would like to swear in >> even even if you're thinking about it. You may choose not to. You might want to stand and swear in just in case. >> The testimony you're about to give.

580
03:02:30.479 --> 03:02:48.680
>> Yes, of course. My name is Lori Ali. I live at 10325 Kitten Trail, Hudson. I've lived in Pasco County my whole life. I moved from Newport Richie to Hudson because of the rural factor and that I could have livestock.

581
03:02:49.040 --> 03:03:04.640
Uh the county the county must grow. The development has to happen to some degree, but at what cost? And um this young lady has gone to a great deal of time and energy and education to tell us

582
03:03:04.640 --> 03:03:20.319
how compatible this is going to be. Well, it's not going to be compatible. We're all rural. We're all got livestock. We all got a different lifestyle than where she lives on Grand Boulevard. Um we also don't have the

583
03:03:20.319 --> 03:03:35.439
millions of dollars that these people have to give the county. We're just the people that live there, have raised our families, and enjoyed the open area. All the all the um construction has changed

584
03:03:35.439 --> 03:03:52.399
like so many people have said. Yes, there is an animal issue. Yes, there is a water issue. We all have wells. We're all concerned about it. But I have to say also that um I'm pretty cynical about the whole thing because this is

585
03:03:52.399 --> 03:04:08.479
going to happen. They have millions. Y'all aren't going to just say, "Okay, it's rural. These people have lived there." I've lived on Kitten Trail for 40 years. And um I appreciate you guys time. I appreciate y'all listening. So,

586
03:04:08.479 --> 03:04:33.520
you do know how we feel even though I feel like it isn't going to make much difference. But thank you for your time this afternoon. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else? >> If not, uh,

587
03:04:33.520 --> 03:04:50.000
>> wait a minute, Barbara. >> Barbara, >> and you need to be sworn. >> No, I've been sworn. My name is Anne Aerson. I live at 11439 Kitten Trail. I shared 279 ft of my rear property with

588
03:04:50.000 --> 03:05:07.040
the project. We've only been here for three years, but we've grown to love it. We moved here for the same reasons everybody else did. To be rural, to be in the country, to have animals. I have goats. My neighbors have a horse and a donkey. We all have dogs. I have chickens. It's

589
03:05:07.040 --> 03:05:24.000
great. I love it. However, when you put up these homes behind us, these people who come to buy these homes, when you walk in that neighborhood and you're house shopping, it seems suburban. It doesn't seem rural. Well, they're going to get a surprise if they buy on the

590
03:05:24.000 --> 03:05:40.319
perimeter in the back. They're going to hear gunshots. They're going to smell horses and donkeys and goats. They're going to hear roosters when they want to sleep in. So, guess where it's going to happen? and they're going to call the sheriff and go, "Hey, then they're going to come

591
03:05:40.319 --> 03:05:56.000
talk to us." And that's not right. It's real hard to back suburban up to rural. While I appreciate the 40ft buffer, I'm really glad about that. These 70 foot lots,

592
03:05:56.000 --> 03:06:13.359
that can't happen. There'll be four homes behind me. There'd be 12 to my neighbor to the east and then three on the next five lots to my west. This isn't compatible. It does not mesh.

593
03:06:13.359 --> 03:06:30.640
The family, what is it? The uh Hudson family trail that only affects like six people. This affects a lot of people. the buffer that's on the uh family Hudson family trail, that's thick woods.

594
03:06:30.640 --> 03:06:46.319
They never had to touch it. That is a natural buffer. These little trees, even if six feet high, they're they're not going to grow fast. I don't know what else to say at this point. I'm against it. But thank you for your time.

595
03:06:46.319 --> 03:07:06.720
>> Thank you for coming. Good afternoon, Tim Low 10408 Kitten Trail. Hudson in Florida. I have been sworn. Uh chair, commission, thank you for your time. I believe the real question today is compatibility. Uh it's kind of where we left off with our

596
03:07:06.720 --> 03:07:23.840
meeting in April. Um we had over 17 people come forward as we did today to speak um in opposition to this project mainly because of lack of compatibility. um that primary reason being density. We're talking about 331

597
03:07:23.840 --> 03:07:41.359
acres um of a project with a large amount of homes, industrial, residential, and from the last meeting. The only thing that changed was a little bit of modified buffer to the southern end, contrary to what the board had

598
03:07:41.359 --> 03:07:56.160
requested, contrary to what the um neighbors had requested. Um they also came forward with some comparison projects in the area. six projects I believe um five of them that have already been talked about how they do

599
03:07:56.160 --> 03:08:14.960
not compare to this project were the uh family trail project 38 acres blackwell 107 acres palm wind 116 sacken 34 acres summerchase uh 39 acres

600
03:08:14.960 --> 03:08:30.479
summerchase I think wasn't that approved like in 2006 quite a while ago not really a good comparison. My point here is those five projects all combined will fit on the Denton Avenue project

601
03:08:30.479 --> 03:08:46.880
within a couple acres plus or minus completely different scale. So in in my opinion that's not not comparable. Um, the one that would be objectively uh compared would be Denton Place, a little

602
03:08:46.880 --> 03:09:02.160
bit over a quarter mile away down on Denton Avenue. It's fairly equal in size, 306 acres, um, 800 units. Um, scale-wise, very, very similar.

603
03:09:02.160 --> 03:09:17.359
However, the surrounding property is not. To the north, you have a mobile home park. To the south you have uh Densson Avenue and then the eastern property there is Pasco Facilities Management and then on the western side

604
03:09:17.359 --> 03:09:34.160
you've got some lots but also Pasco County rightway and then I'm sorry you've got towards the northern portion of that western lot you have some 50 to 60 foot wide lots that border that uh that western

605
03:09:34.160 --> 03:09:51.120
property line. majority of its Pasco County rightway and then five rural lots that are affected. So the big takeaway between those properties or projects and this one is you don't have the amount of people that are coming forward in opposition, the amount of rural property

606
03:09:51.120 --> 03:10:08.760
owners that are affected by it. Um so when we had that meeting last last month, I think we communicated that quite well and I just want to reiterate that. So again, thank you for listening. Thank you for your time. All right. Thank you very much.

607
03:10:11.760 --> 03:10:29.680
Okay. Is that about do it for the from the audience? If so, would the applicant come back up and maybe answer some of those questions, concerns? Just before Barbara speaks, we just confirm there's nobody online.

608
03:10:29.680 --> 03:10:46.880
Staff, we have no virtual commenters on this one. Right, >> Giana. >> There's nobody signed up to speak on this one virtually. >> Correct. There is nobody online. >> Okay. Thank you. >> We Yeah. Okay. So, Miss W, we had some questions about

609
03:10:46.880 --> 03:11:04.000
drainage, questions about where the water's coming from, uh discussion about the Bolton connection, uh about uh wildlife surveys maybe, and um

610
03:11:04.000 --> 03:11:24.640
where you're going to put the one-story buildings. I think those were the main some of the major concerns. Okay. >> So, a couple things. I'll have Joseph come up and talk drainage. We had four neighborhood meetings, so he's talked drainage a lot. He did the uh grading

611
03:11:24.640 --> 03:11:41.439
plan in between our third and fourth meetings. So, he's very familiar with the the grading out there, the drainage out there, what he needs to do um to deal to address the water impact from this project. Um with regard to wells and I'm sure Mr. will in the concern of one of the

612
03:11:41.439 --> 03:11:57.200
neighbors that they'll have to give up their well. The water supply is coming from Central Water and sewer which is on Denton Avenue at this project. The public infrastructure is sitting at the front door of this project. The comp plan says where you have public water

613
03:11:57.200 --> 03:12:13.040
and sewer, central water and sewer, minimum density is three units per acre. And it says that for a reason. It's so that the the investment in public infrastructure is not wasted by the fact that there's a desire to have lower

614
03:12:13.040 --> 03:12:29.200
density because the decision to put in central water and sewer is based upon future land use plans. The future land use on this property is res six. So I understand the question and the concern about losing wells, but there's no pipes coming a

615
03:12:29.200 --> 03:12:43.200
long way. They're sitting at the door. The center water and sewer is sitting there. The minimum density for the comp plan supposed to be three units per acre. I did the calculation because I'm like, "Oh my goodness, we keep going around in circles with regard to all the density. What is our density?" So, I did

616
03:12:43.200 --> 03:13:01.439
it um based upon Jose's plans. We have 258 251.8 developable acres divided by 832 units is 3.026. That is our density. Um the res six portion is 3.4. The res

617
03:13:01.439 --> 03:13:18.880
three portion is is 2.5. The neighbors that talked about the north versus the south spur, that's in the res six, excuse me, in the res three land use where our density will be 2.5 units per acre. And yes, we'll have one-story homes on that spur all the way around that spur.

618
03:13:18.880 --> 03:13:33.760
Um, Bolton, I know we talk a lot of technical things here. Vision Road. It's the fact that the Vision Road network and what the future network is and the county's improvements to the roadway network in the future and what and you guys know

619
03:13:33.760 --> 03:13:49.760
this and what that is intended to be. Where does the county want to put improvements to build out their their network for county buildout and they did want to do it on Kitten, but the county's changed it to Bolton. So, I just wanted to explain that a little bit further.

620
03:13:49.760 --> 03:14:07.680
Um, let me just obviously the conversation regarding rural versus urban. I did I took notes when Mr. Roberts spoke. Um, >> we have to we have to balance here just because we have the folks that have a

621
03:14:07.680 --> 03:14:23.439
rural their rural homes and and their and their lives versus this property that has rights to it's a res six land use. It's not in a rural protected area. Our neighbors to the south aren't in a rural protected area. They're in a res three area. So I think it's important to

622
03:14:23.439 --> 03:14:40.080
understand that I've tried to achieve that balance and respected the fact that they have their homes and they're rural. But I also need to understand that we also have property rights and and try to achieve a balance between where you have central water and sewer where we're not

623
03:14:40.080 --> 03:14:55.279
doing the the density based upon the land use. I I noticed, you know, he said we're make sure that you have density where infrastructure exists and comprehensive land use plans provides. That's exactly what we have here. We have the infrastructure here. Um we've

624
03:14:55.279 --> 03:15:12.439
done the traffic studies pursuant to the code. We meet all the requirements with regard to our traffic on Denton. We'll actually eventually our our project will put in a traffic light um which will actually slow down and make people stop um which I think that will be good. Um,

625
03:15:12.560 --> 03:15:30.560
I'll I'll have Joe come up here in one second so he can talk about flooding and animals. Um, and Mrs. Low said why we changed our project in 2022. It wasn't based upon TVRPC. It was based upon listening to their

626
03:15:30.560 --> 03:15:46.640
comments. the pages of documents that you have um in your record with all of the comments from 2022. We read every one of them. When Mr. Melum came on board to represent the property owner, he read every one of them. So, it wasn't some TBRPC study. It was actually

627
03:15:46.640 --> 03:16:05.920
listening to the neighbors. I we approached this the same issue came up in Sackleen on Foxfire near Colony um east of Peach Tree on the south side of Hudson with regard to we live a rural lifestyle we have animals we have your your residents won't know and what the

628
03:16:05.920 --> 03:16:21.200
board county commissioners asked us to do was write a condition a rural disclosure condition and I have written that language and we can certainly add that um like the board asked us to add in for Sackleen um which had the similar concerns, we can certainly add that

629
03:16:21.200 --> 03:16:38.560
disclosure into this project if you want to. I can send it hand it out, but we do have a condition so that all of our property owners across our project would will know, you know, where they're where they're choosing to live. >> Can you read that disclosure? >> Sure. Um, I can actually pass it out to

630
03:16:38.560 --> 03:17:01.359
you. I made copies. >> Motion to receive on file. >> Second. All >> in favor? The applicant developer shall shall provide written disclosure to all units within the Denton Avenue MPUD that they are purchasing a residence in proximity

631
03:17:01.359 --> 03:17:18.560
to properly currently zoned AR and AC which allows commercial farming and agricultural activities, general farming pursuits and maintaining livestock protected by the Florida Right to Farm Act, Florida statute section 823.14. The applicant developer shall provide a copy of the written disclosure to the

632
03:17:18.560 --> 03:17:34.560
county concurrent with the associated record plan. This disclosure obligation will cease if all the lands within a half mile of the MPUD have been reszoned to a zoning district that does not allow for commercial farming and agricultural activities, general farming pursuits, and maintaining livestock. The reason

633
03:17:34.560 --> 03:17:50.560
why that second sentence, that last sentence was in there because like this area that we have res six and res three, that area also had a different future land use from how it was currently developed. So if the property ultimately in the area ultimately develops differently, that's what that was

634
03:17:50.560 --> 03:18:15.760
written for. But we certainly can add that condition. Um the board asked for that in approving Sacklesen. >> Did I catch everything, Mr. Chairman? >> Uh I think the only thing you didn't talk about were the um wildlife surveys.

635
03:18:15.760 --> 03:18:32.640
>> I will have Mr. Simino come up and talk about wildlife and uh drainage. >> Okay. >> And wells and water and Before you do that, >> one of the questions the public asked which I think would be reasonable to answer

636
03:18:32.640 --> 03:18:48.880
is the suggestion was made to come back with some 1acre lots. So why can't we do that? >> So we were asked the same question in our neighborhood meetings and the client did evaluate that. Um they to the residents the same residents asking for

637
03:18:48.880 --> 03:19:03.120
it. Now, we're at our neighborhood meetings and he did evaluate that and the feasibility of that. Um, I can have him come up and answer it if you'd like. >> Best person to do it to talk about it is the person that actually looked into it. So, I'd be happy to do that.

638
03:19:03.120 --> 03:19:22.239
>> Okay, great. >> We've got Joe at the moment. So, let's let Joe >> Yeah, that's fine. >> Let's let Joe come up and talk Joe's stuff. Thank you. >> All right. Hello again, everyone. Uh we'll start with drainage. This is um you know a lot of times when we develop

639
03:19:22.239 --> 03:19:36.960
property we have water. >> Sorry, could you just for the record read your name? >> Yeah. Joe Simino W Engineering 12363 Hampton Park Drive, Tampa, Florida 33624. Um a lot of projects we do, we have

640
03:19:36.960 --> 03:19:52.880
water shedding off the site into neighboring communities into neighboring uh waterways and we have to make sure we're maintaining rate and volume leaving the site. This is a rare one where all the surrounding water is coming at us. So, we've uh painstakingly done a pretty elaborate grading plan

641
03:19:52.880 --> 03:20:08.479
with a lot of detail, much more than we would do at this level of planning to make sure that the critical locations where water is entering our site, there's probably about a half a dozen critical locations. We've uh we have allocated room for um drainage inlet

642
03:20:08.479 --> 03:20:23.840
intakes and easements to get water to our very very large ponds that we've incorporated into this plan that are sized to hold the 100red-year storm event uh without even considering uh infiltration which will absolutely happen out here. Um Miss Bolton's

643
03:20:23.840 --> 03:20:39.279
concerned, she's absolutely uh got an issue in her yard. She's south and west of our site. We don't really share the same watershed. Um, but I would be more than happy to, you know, volunteer my time to talk to her and see what can be done on her property. But her her water

644
03:20:39.279 --> 03:20:55.600
doesn't come at us and our water doesn't go at her. Um, from a wildlife standpoint, uh, the this application itself required a full comprehensive threatened endangered species survey. Uh if this proceeds when we go to construction plan review, whether

645
03:20:55.600 --> 03:21:12.720
there's one phase of construction or it's broken up into multiple, each application will require a new threatened and endangered species report. And then even once and if it goes that far, even if that's approved, prior to construction, we're required to do another threatened and endangered

646
03:21:12.720 --> 03:21:29.279
species survey uh no less than 90 days ahead of construction to just see what the final result is. And any threatened endangered species um have to be accommodated. Uh in some cases that means changing construction schedule, adding additional buffers. With gopher

647
03:21:29.279 --> 03:21:46.000
tortois, it means relocating them to a mitigation site. So there's basically three levels of checks on the threatened endangered species leading up to construction to make sure they are not bulldozed over. That's not a thing that happens anymore. >> So okay.

648
03:21:46.000 --> 03:22:01.359
So have you found a lot of wildlife on that site? >> Yes. Uh the initial MPUD uh found 100 gopher tortoises which is pretty standard for a site that size. Um, the good thing is just looking at the map, the highest concentration is along the

649
03:22:01.359 --> 03:22:18.560
southern property line and the park area to the south that we're that we're actually preserving. So that's actually where the highest density is. >> Great. Any questions? >> Okay, thanks. >> Landscaping trees along the southern

650
03:22:18.560 --> 03:22:33.840
boundary. >> Would you like me to go into that? >> Sure. Yes. Um, we were also looking at the aerial maps in Google Earth 3D, which actually allows you to see more 3D versions of trees and um, yes, there's not a forest like those other pictures you saw on the southern half of the

651
03:22:33.840 --> 03:22:49.760
property. However, there is a tree line along the southern boundary. Um, it's absolutely in what would normally be the the grading limits of a normal project. Um, you know, no developer wants to remove trees if they if they don't have

652
03:22:49.760 --> 03:23:05.200
to. But in many cases, you have to raise the site, grade the land, and you end up removing those trees and planting a new buffer. The painstaking efforts we took on our grading plan, one of the questions or one of the challenges that I was tasked with was, can we not touch

653
03:23:05.200 --> 03:23:21.359
any trees along the southern property line with our grading plan? And we made it work. There's a lot of ups and downs. I didn't think it would. Um, but we're committed to preserving all the existing vegetation along the southern property line. And there is absolutely a mature tree line along along most of that

654
03:23:21.359 --> 03:23:47.200
boundary that would be preserved because of the grading. And I'm happy to answer any other questions. >> Anything from up here? >> Thank you, Joe. >> Thank you. Good afternoon. Uh my name is Robert

655
03:23:47.200 --> 03:24:03.120
Melson and I am developing the uh property on behalf of New Strategy Holding. So I guess the question was how do we define the the width of the lots that will be in this community? And >> that wasn't the question. >> What was the question? The question was

656
03:24:03.120 --> 03:24:18.560
when we had our last hearing, there was some suggestion that we'd probably find this property more compatible if there were some 1acre lots to help make a

657
03:24:18.560 --> 03:24:34.239
transition to surrounding properties. So, what I'm asking is how come or what is the problem with providing some 1acre lots? Well, if you want to refer to it as what is the problem, I don't know if I'm really going to answer the question that

658
03:24:34.239 --> 03:24:51.120
way, but I'm going to tell you how we um define the lavits that we have. You know, again, as what we are is we're a community developer and we develop communities and we sell our lots to home builders. So, the way that we defined the maximum width of a lot that would be

659
03:24:51.120 --> 03:25:08.239
on this property was by speaking to the group of home builders that we typically do work with. And when I spoke to them, you know, had, you know, many conversations with, uh, you know, marketing people with the home builders and division presidents and operating uh, executives, they said the maximum

660
03:25:08.239 --> 03:25:25.439
size lot that we could we we would be interested in purchasing on this property in this market is a 70 foot wide lot. So, what we decided to do was we decided to, you know, place the 70 foot lots along the uh the southern

661
03:25:25.439 --> 03:25:42.319
portion of the property. And we're really seeing this more like a uh an enclave. And I'm doing another uh community with 70 foot lots, and those homes are selling for $7800,000. So, that is why we have 70 foot lots.

662
03:25:42.319 --> 03:26:08.000
It's it's a market driven response. Any comment? >> No. Just wanted to know any other questions the team can answer. So I would just close in just saying

663
03:26:08.000 --> 03:26:24.239
that land use does matter. It matters both to the residents and it matters to my client. The comprehensive plan was set by the county at six units per acre. We've looked at what's around us. We've made all the changes. We really tried to

664
03:26:24.239 --> 03:26:40.640
come to a reasonable balance. Not a balance that ultimately the the client wanted more. We had plans for more. We took those plans and changed them. After in 2022, it is now 2026. 2022, we took those plans, we changed

665
03:26:40.640 --> 03:26:57.760
them, listening to the neighbors. Then we continued to listen. We did four more neighborhood meetings and then we listened more at planning commission. So, and in the end of the day, you have to strike a balance between the properties and it's not in a protected rural area,

666
03:26:57.760 --> 03:27:13.279
but we've tried to balance it as though it was. And that's what I've tried to do. I've tried to provide a benefit where we can with off-site improvements, on-site improvements. And so it's been very thoughtful. It's

667
03:27:13.279 --> 03:27:28.880
been a journey to get here. We're not changing the land use. Um we are respecting the land use. And I know it's a hard decision for you all. But I think we've done what we can and

668
03:27:28.880 --> 03:27:44.479
what we need to do. And by the way, what we're required to do because there's actually a comp plan and a code to follow here that says what we have to do to be able to be approved. and we ultimately have met those and exceeded those time after time. So with that, I will let you all make your decision and

669
03:27:44.479 --> 03:28:11.760
your recommendation to the board. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. So, do we have a motion for purposes of discussion? I don't have a motion, but I I I still

670
03:28:11.760 --> 03:28:27.520
have a concern with emergency access and I understand there isn't um a want to kitten trail. So, I was wondering if there was how for the right right away. Can you can

671
03:28:27.520 --> 03:28:43.600
you speak on Bolton and how that's being preserved or accessed or what are you doing because it doesn't seem like you're paving that but there's a park along there. I just want to make sure in an event of an emergencies they can and I'm sure that passive park if there was

672
03:28:43.600 --> 03:28:58.239
a sidewalk there or a fire truck will drive right up it if it needs but um you know I I still have that concern. So, I was wondering if there was some sort of um what's happening with that Bolton right of way.

673
03:28:58.239 --> 03:29:14.880
>> Sure. So, Bolton, as as you've heard from the testimony, the the uh our neighbors, Bolton doesn't exist to our west offsite and to the east, Bolton doesn't exist. So, what we're doing is is preserving the right of way. We'll

674
03:29:14.880 --> 03:29:30.880
build portions of Denton, excuse me, of Bolton as needed for the project. It's not intended to be emergency access. It's just a road that we put in through the middle of our property so that the county in the future when they have a buildout network they'll have the ability to extend Bolton to coyote if

675
03:29:30.880 --> 03:29:44.880
they'd like because Coyote's a vision road as well. They can get Bolton to Hicks or Bolton to Little both vision roads. So that frames out your your but it frames out the ultimate uh buildout network

676
03:29:44.880 --> 03:30:02.319
again on emergency access. If if you all want to recommend that absolutely just we can accommodate it. We've had it in our plans. We'd accommodate it. Um make that recommendation, debate it, you know, talk about it between yourselves. If that's the motion with with that condition, that's fine. Ultimately, I

677
03:30:02.319 --> 03:30:18.080
mean, I think it would be helpful to the board of county commissioners to get your thoughts on emergency access as a collective body. So, um our we have two functional accesses as you heard, uh Mr. Bmillian say. The code requires at the number of units we're

678
03:30:18.080 --> 03:30:33.840
going to have around 600 or 601, we have to have two functional accesses. Um, under that, you have to have emergency access. Um, so and functional access, one functional access and emergency access. But we're going to have two functional accesses and we'll meet the

679
03:30:33.840 --> 03:30:50.479
code requirements. But I can tell you I did the same thing at Sackles. It was the same conversation. You It was like to have or not to have and and ultimately the board made the decision not to have. I I don't know what'll be decided here. So, I'm fine either way. >> I think I'm kind of with Liam on on

680
03:30:50.479 --> 03:31:05.680
this. I think condition 22 says that there will be no emergency or vehicular access. And then I know in the memo it says that fire had no comment, but we also heard from the fire department several months ago that they really don't look at it until site plan. thought it seemed like to me. Um, so I

681
03:31:05.680 --> 03:31:21.840
just maybe we don't limit it completely or you know because you got the binding site plan that's going to show the park but if fire determines they need access I think we need to leave the door open for that. What would be my thought? And I think we had a lot of discussion

682
03:31:21.840 --> 03:31:37.439
last time talking about making sure if there is emergency access it is cannot be converted to as much legally as possible not converted to full access. So I mean I would be hoping to have some

683
03:31:37.439 --> 03:31:54.239
sort of condition where it's you know hey it's up to fire but in the event that they determine they want emergency access that it cannot be converted um or restrictive as possible. Um, >> we have a condition in Sackleton. I

684
03:31:54.239 --> 03:32:10.800
didn't bring it. I was read it. We did the same thing. We had to dedicate on the plat dedicate ingress egress rights and that one included emergency access. Um, but you certainly could take the same sackle language that we put together with the county attorney's

685
03:32:10.800 --> 03:32:27.040
office and they had like three different ways that we we had to make sure that we couldn't convert by we handling it on the plat that we couldn't convert later to full access. >> We certainly can handle that. for Bolton.

686
03:32:27.040 --> 03:32:42.080
Your east side, although I don't think it is a public road, goes to that Mattis road >> to Mattis, right? >> Um, how is that being handled with that road because I think you said you would be building

687
03:32:42.080 --> 03:32:58.880
that road but not con connecting. >> The con the conditions say that we'll build Bolton as needed for the project. So depending on our ultimate layout, >> um we may never get to the property lines, both the west and the east will convey

688
03:32:58.880 --> 03:33:18.800
the right of way. Mattis Road is um a county on Pasco Mapper is a countymaintained road but on private property. There's no right away for Mattis Road. But ultimately, we also wrote a condition that ultimately if we do end

689
03:33:18.800 --> 03:33:42.319
up constructing to our eastern property line, then there's a provision of how we barricade that and so forth. But, you know, we're open for ideas on on Bolton certainly, but that's how the conditions read. I thought there was a pretty strong

690
03:33:42.319 --> 03:34:00.080
uh push by the residents not to have any vehicular access from Gen Trail. I I agree. I'm I'm not saying that there has to be emergency access. I was saying, you know, I I wish fire maybe

691
03:34:00.080 --> 03:34:15.760
made a comment. I I mean I do have a concern that there's only two accesses from Bolton. This stretches all the way or from Denton and it stretches all the way down to Kitten and I mean that's a long way and there's

692
03:34:15.760 --> 03:34:32.800
houses in there. So I mean I would be concerned for emergency access. Now I'm not the emergency access guy. So I would I would defer to somebody else the making that determination at site plane review. So that's why I was asking on Bolton if it goes to Mattis, can there

693
03:34:32.800 --> 03:34:49.200
be emergency access over there somehow or you know as you could if at some point Mattis was improved to county standards? Yes. The reason they're having to barricade the access to Mattis is because it's not

694
03:34:49.200 --> 03:35:04.640
improved. Mattis is not a standard roadway. That's why that's why they're barricading the access to Mattis. It's not a standard roadway. But we've done before, the county's done before that they still provide emergency

695
03:35:04.640 --> 03:35:29.120
access to a substandard road as long as the fire marshall says it's got enough compaction to to carry emergency vehicles. Has anybody I don't know if anybody's evaluated Mattis for emergency access

696
03:35:29.120 --> 03:35:53.760
staff. Does anybody know whether Mattis has been evaluated for emergency access? >> It has not. >> I mean I don't know if anybody else has this other concern. Maybe there can be some sort of added condition that says the fire will review if it needs

697
03:35:53.760 --> 03:36:09.840
emergency access. I I mean I I feel like there should be some sort of emergency access, but I understand the residents don't want it. I understand it, you know, entirely up to the board, but I I think there I think somebody should look at it and maybe fire review says nope,

698
03:36:09.840 --> 03:36:26.720
not needed. All good. That's their review. That's there. But I think there should be a maybe a called out condition that fire should specifically review if there needs to be emergency access and maybe that emergency act access option is to

699
03:36:26.720 --> 03:36:42.640
kitten or to Mattis and it gets reviewed at that time and that it has a condition that it well except for Bolton but a condition that it will never turn into a full you know vehicle access just like Sackle.

700
03:36:42.640 --> 03:37:04.880
>> Whoa. The fire department does review MPDs. Did they comment on this? >> Fire issued. >> Uh the comment no comment. >> Maybe they reviewed it and say no

701
03:37:04.880 --> 03:37:29.279
emergency access, but I >> I don't know how much review fire does with MPUDs. When they issued the could comment no comment was at that time was there no access to kitten >> because this plan has been through a few iterations.

702
03:37:29.279 --> 03:37:45.439
>> My laptop has now died since it's 5:15. I'd like to uh use Giannis as a laner and I can check that out for you. Well, while he's checking that out, too. Condition 17 does say that the access points in the master plan are conceptual only. Permanent placement of each access

703
03:37:45.439 --> 03:38:01.520
point shall be determined at the time of review with the corresponding preliminary site plan. I'm not sure what PDP is. >> Yeah, but I there's a different condition dealing with access to kitten, >> right? That's what I'm saying. And then 22 then says there's not going to be any

704
03:38:01.520 --> 03:38:29.600
access to kitten. That's in the dedication or rightway section. >> I I don't know if I'm the only one with this concern. And and again, I I will defer to somebody else to make that decision who's more qualified to see if

705
03:38:29.600 --> 03:38:46.720
there's emergency access or not. I have no issue with that. >> Well, perhaps you could. I'm just trying to think of what you could do today. Um, is if you ultimately recommend approval, you could certainly ask that emergency

706
03:38:46.720 --> 03:39:02.479
access an option of how that could be done be presented to the board so they have an option. Is it Mattis? Is it kitten? Could it be Mattis? >> And maybe and maybe fire can >> and fire could weigh in. >> An affirmative answer from fire.

707
03:39:02.479 --> 03:39:18.080
>> Right. So when evaluating the option of emergency access so they would have an informed decision. >> Yeah. I mean >> they could have fire look at it. >> You could move it forward with a recommendation that fire rescue reook at the >> reviews and make a comment on if they need emergency access and if so where >> really look at it.

708
03:39:18.080 --> 03:39:34.239
>> Um as opposed to just issuing a response with no comment. They specifically look at whether there needs to be an additional emergency access or not. >> I'm good with that. And if so whether Mattis would suffice, >> it's a good idea.

709
03:39:34.239 --> 03:39:50.479
>> I think that works. >> Not sure what Mattis gets you over the second access that they have. It if one had an emergency, you would have to enter the project. Let's assume that the emergency happens down on the south end of the project

710
03:39:50.479 --> 03:40:06.239
closer to the Kitten Trail sign. The emergency vehicle would enter from Denton Avenue, drive all the way down to the south side of the project and then have to drive all the way back to the north side of the project to get back

711
03:40:06.239 --> 03:40:23.600
out. And Denton does not go through and Mattis, I'm sorry, does not go through to Kitten. So you'd end up in back in the same place. You may be a few hundred feet east or west of where you started, but at the end of the day, you're back to Dent. You went full circle and back to Denton.

712
03:40:23.600 --> 03:40:39.840
Your point is unless it's the connections to kitten, it's not going to do you any good >> and or Bolton there. Bolton is a possibility. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Liam, I tend to agree with you. I mean, >> whether it says it on the map or not, if emergencies there, fire vehicles going

713
03:40:39.840 --> 03:40:57.439
to use the kitten trail >> trail access to kitten. I mean, that's reality. I mean, I've seen them drive down the trails before. I've seen them drive down the Starky Trail. I mean, so >> we'll just use the the pedestrian trail. >> Use a pedestrian trail. I mean, it's a

714
03:40:57.439 --> 03:41:11.600
10 foot trail going to kitten. >> Yes, >> correct. >> That's correct. Yes. I mean >> could be >> we certainly can take the idea which is between now and the board to have

715
03:41:11.600 --> 03:41:30.319
fire weigh in fire emergency weigh in >> look at Mattis look at that and let them offer their professional opinion >> and if they're fine driving down the trail that's fine too. >> Yeah. >> Right. Right. Yeah. Well, my one of the biggest concerns I

716
03:41:30.319 --> 03:41:46.720
have is even if we wanted to deny this application, don't we have we have some legal issues there? Because this property was already identified and approved for land use res

717
03:41:46.720 --> 03:42:03.040
six. >> Yes, >> they're making a lot of modifications to come down from those those you know that that type of designation from what you said 1400 units down to

718
03:42:03.040 --> 03:42:21.680
>> 1462 to 832 6 units per acre to 3.0 which by the way the surrounding land use is three units per acre. you know, it would be no different than if we tried to take a land use away from an adjoining property owner that they already had.

719
03:42:21.680 --> 03:42:38.960
And you know, if you had a 5 acre piece and you had the right to do certain things on that property according to the land use, you know, I I think you'd have some challenges if you wanted to take away their property rights

720
03:42:38.960 --> 03:42:56.399
and could put us in a very tenuous legal position. You know, that's why I was encouraging you to try to be as accommodating as you possibly could to the residents in that area because,

721
03:42:56.399 --> 03:43:15.279
you know, we want to get the best you want to make the best deal you can, >> the best balance we can >> surrounding property owners, >> the best balance. >> And so, David, that's probably a question for you.

722
03:43:15.279 --> 03:43:32.000
Well, I mean, it's a balancing act because as you know, there's also comp plan provisions and case law saying that you're not entitled to the maximum that land use, >> right? And they're not taking the maximum, >> right? So, um, but

723
03:43:32.000 --> 03:43:46.640
>> you know, I can't tell you that that that there's no grounds for a denial, but I but this is certainly not as >> certainly not as as easy to deny as if they were requesting a plan amendment, >> right?

724
03:43:46.640 --> 03:44:04.160
>> Um, there is a presumption that that you should approve it if it's consistent with a comp plan. So, I said last time I didn't want to deny it, and I still don't want to deny it because I recognize people have property rights.

725
03:44:04.160 --> 03:44:19.680
No different than anybody else who's come up to speak today. If they want to go and build something on their property, they have rights to do that, too. So, we recognize propert and there's a property rights element in the comp plan. We recognize property rights. To

726
03:44:19.680 --> 03:44:37.520
me, this case comes down to And this will be interesting, David, going into next year. What is compatibility? And Barbara, I'll apologize because I don't mean to be putting words in your mouth, but

727
03:44:37.520 --> 03:44:56.800
to the applicant compatibility is I did an analysis and see I've determined my analysis determines this is compatible because you voted over here this way and you voted over here that way. >> There may some argument for that, some justification,

728
03:44:56.800 --> 03:45:11.600
but I also give some weight to some of the arguments made by the residents today that the mass the scale of the project that we're talking about is not the same

729
03:45:11.600 --> 03:45:28.399
as this mass the scale of this project. Hudson Family Trails acreage is and total unit count is no and is not the same as what this project is. And I think one resident pointed out that at Hudson Family Trail it affected six or

730
03:45:28.399 --> 03:45:44.720
seven property owners and I quickly pulled it up on the aerial and that was true. I think I counted seven. There's more property owners that are affected by this property. Why I say to the David, what'll be interesting next year is we have HB399 that the governor

731
03:45:44.720 --> 03:46:01.279
signed and we're going to actually have to define what's compatible. And the law says we're also going to have to define what mitigating measures can be implemented when things aren't compatible. So that's

732
03:46:01.279 --> 03:46:18.800
a that's something we're all going to have to figure out. It's my understanding the staff is supposedly working on >> comp plan and LDC provisions to implement that bill. >> Well, and I'm sure they'll be a subject to great debate when they get to the >> Yes. Planning Commission

733
03:46:18.800 --> 03:46:35.199
and the public needs to keep their eye on that ball because that's that's right now what's compatible there. I looked in the comp plan glossery. There's no definition of compatible in our comp plan glossery. So, I know typically

734
03:46:35.199 --> 03:46:50.239
in law, if there's not something that's a defined term, then we look to what's the common meaning of that word. And this is interesting because while we were talking today, I was researching this

735
03:46:50.239 --> 03:47:06.800
and looking this up. In a legal context, compatible generally means the capacity for two or more things, activities or entities to coexist, function or be held concurrently in harmony without causing material interference, conflict or negative alteration.

736
03:47:06.800 --> 03:47:22.399
And the exact definition depends on the area of the law. And the first example given is land use and zoning. In zoning law, a compatible use means developments or activities can sit near each other in harmony. I'm not quite sure what in harmony

737
03:47:22.399 --> 03:47:39.359
means, but to me, if there was harmony here, I wouldn't have a full house. And I think it's important for the applicant

738
03:47:39.359 --> 03:47:54.000
to continue to work with the neighbors to find some way to coexist in harmony. Clearly, there's not harmony right now. There's discontent, but I recognize both

739
03:47:54.000 --> 03:48:16.000
sides of this this argument. >> Can I add something? Your code actually defines compatibility >> where because I >> it's 5. It's 522.4a1 compatibility of uses. It actually exists. Your complaint gets implemented by your code. You actually should read

740
03:48:16.000 --> 03:48:33.199
the code. or read it. >> It's I would just instead of reading >> nothing in the comp plan glossery, >> right? But but that's because your code implements your comp plan and you actually adopted development standards

741
03:48:33.199 --> 03:48:50.080
522.4 A1. I was read it and I was like I thought the same thing about compatibility. But it actually says it in the code. Where does it say? >> Says applicants must demonstrate through lot sizes, buffers between uses or other information

742
03:48:50.080 --> 03:49:06.720
that the project as designed transitions appropriately to adjacent uses transitions appropriately to adjacent uses or effectively shields adjacent uses in the absence of lot and use compatibility.

743
03:49:06.720 --> 03:49:22.560
Your code has said that if you buffer you can achieve compatibility even if you don't have lot compatibility. >> Does the code define what is effectively shield? >> Yes, it does. It's in your land development code what you've adopted for

744
03:49:22.560 --> 03:49:38.800
buffers. What the the county has said in the land development code between this use and this use this is your required buffer. What I did was exceeded that three four times. So I didn't take the the basics here and say it says or and I

745
03:49:38.800 --> 03:49:55.120
can what the other ones did by the way the ones I told you about they just went with the code. What I did was I said okay I'm going to achieve use compatibility lockability and I'm going to do the buffer. The other projects came in and read this and said I'm just going to have to all I got

746
03:49:55.120 --> 03:50:11.439
to do is comply with the code compliant buffer and I'm compatible as a matter of your code. Well, the only difference between that and the land development code is right now you don't have the zoning. That's what you're here asking. >> But that's but the but the land development code tells me when I'm if

747
03:50:11.439 --> 03:50:27.680
I'm zoned compatible >> the zoning first. You got to get it. >> Well, we can stay a togg and there's no buffer. >> So, but anyway, I don't want I don't it's not my job to argue with you develop. I just wanted to point out there's actually a code that's been implemented

748
03:50:27.680 --> 03:50:46.960
>> instead of >> after we get this all. >> Okay, >> I'm going to sit down, leave you guys be >> to me, speaking for myself. >> We're compatible when maybe only one or two people have a

749
03:50:46.960 --> 03:51:02.800
complaint or a minor complaint, not when a room full of people have complaint. And again, I don't want to deny the project for me, and I'm not making a motion. I'll let somebody else go out on a limb

750
03:51:02.800 --> 03:51:20.880
here. I think a continuence is an order so that they can go work out their differences. And I asked the applicant I I don't know you don't the public probably doesn't get to see the ex party disclosures but I did have a discussion with

751
03:51:20.880 --> 03:51:37.359
Barbara and her client and I asked if they had any additional neighborhood meetings and the answer is no. I personally think some additional neighborhood meetings

752
03:51:37.359 --> 03:51:53.279
and hopefully some ability to compromise on both sides can get the issue resolved. But I think we'll have harmony, compatibility, and harmony when there's not a line of people that need to continue to come up

753
03:51:53.279 --> 03:52:10.399
here and tell us about how this is not compatible with their way of life. And I'm sorry, in my opinion, the fact that whatever builder you're dealing with doesn't want to buy oneacre

754
03:52:10.399 --> 03:52:29.279
lots is a you problem, not a community problem. I think I'd probably be dialing and finding somebody that might want to do some larger lots because I think that's going to be the answer out here, at least for me. We'll see what the other

755
03:52:29.279 --> 03:52:59.680
guys want to recommend and what the board does, but that's just where I'm at with it. >> Well, Barbara, you know, I think it's it's a borderline issue here. And how do you feel about a continuence? four years,

756
03:52:59.680 --> 03:53:17.080
four neighborhood meetings, three of them together, a long separation, a fourth one. We have continued and continued. We've struck the balance here.

757
03:53:18.800 --> 03:53:33.760
It's not the project that we had started with either. It's far from the project that this property owner started with to begin with. And that needs to be recognized. I mean, we're looking at it as a point in time today,

758
03:53:33.760 --> 03:53:56.239
but it's been four years. And the project that we started with, which was consistent with the comp plan, was a much different project than we bring you today. Mr. Chair, I I mean, obviously, we're here beling this. There's a lot of

759
03:53:56.239 --> 03:54:13.040
people here. This isn't an easy one. Um I mean to me it comes down to like we've already said, I mean the land use is in place. They're coming in asking for something below the land use acknowledging the fact that there needs to be a change to zoning. I think over the four years I think that

760
03:54:13.040 --> 03:54:28.720
they've worked tirelessly with the neighborhood. We have problems. Every project that comes to us, it seems like has the adjacent property owner doesn't always want what's going to be in their backyard. I think they've made a lot of accommodations. I think they made a lot

761
03:54:28.720 --> 03:54:44.640
of concessions, a lot of changes to their plan. I think they've gone above and beyond in what they're proposing here. They've shown there's compatibility or the adjacent pro surrounding projects have been proven to be compatible with approvals given.

762
03:54:44.640 --> 03:54:59.439
Um, so I just in the essence of getting something on the table, I move for approval. >> I'll second that. >> Let me one second. I do need to add this condition for the rural disclos rural disclosure condition to the conditions

763
03:54:59.439 --> 03:55:17.120
of approval with my motion >> and well I'm wondering if you can add that fire will take a second look >> and I will add that fire will take a second look at this before it goes to the board >> okay for emergency access >> yes for emergency access correct

764
03:55:17.120 --> 03:55:36.239
>> a motion and a second is there any further discussion on the motion If not, all in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Mike sign. >> Yes. >> Motion carries.

765
03:55:36.239 --> 03:56:34.319
All right. >> G, what is the board date? June 16th. >> Yes, sir. Yeah. Oh yeah. >> Do we have to adjourn this meeting? >> We need to adjourn this meeting. >> Move to adjourn. Push back in.

766
03:56:34.319 --> 03:57:04.800
>> You guys can start. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. just end up in a way battle. >> No, I understand. >> I think you I mean my sentiments go with you. >> Well,

767
03:57:04.800 --> 03:57:30.840
>> but legally I don't know >> if we I don't know if we have a strong legal position. my show now. >> You're staying though. >> I'm getting out of here.

768
03:57:42.080 --> 03:58:31.840
>> The building on the third floor. There's an entire floor of that room full of attorneys. >> Well, To me, compatibility is >> I said to me, compatibility is what

769
03:58:31.840 --> 03:59:45.279
people It's on. >> I don't know where I know a couple >> question out. likely to >> how many times have you said somebody here because somebody told me nobody

770
03:59:45.279 --> 04:00:04.160
else would ever >> they never check our office. We sit there and laugh all day long. People will research to get buying a car or a truck >> or even what going to buy at the grocery

771
04:00:04.160 --> 04:00:23.120
store. I have never seen so many people that go out and buy property haven't got a clue right >> what they are buying. >> They don't this look like a beautiful piece of property. Yeah. Well, it floods 5t deep.

772
04:00:23.120 --> 04:00:43.680
>> Or >> they don't understand it. They go down to the city and the city says that zone. >> Well, that's land use res six. You can do six six dwelling units to the acre. >> Yeah. Tell them. Yeah, but 95% of your

773
04:00:43.680 --> 04:01:09.680
property is a jurisdictional wetland. Yeah, but they said they could build 577 units. >> It's like every I've ever had. I thought I can do whatever. >> What do you mean I can do? >> I You look too serious.

774
04:01:09.680 --> 04:01:25.520
>> I got two young guys that work >> ready to go. >> Two young guys that work in my office. >> She had two and a half hours. Three hours. Three hours to cook dinner. What you made? >> I I did. And dessert, too. >> All right. I think we have to wait. The clerk's office has to reboot the

775
04:01:25.520 --> 04:02:27.479
computer. >> If we can wait. Sorry, >> that was boss. >> Christian just sits there. >> I know. We had a previous Yeah, she uh my wife sent to that

776
04:02:33.199 --> 04:02:56.120
>> Cambridge used to pass >> I'm sorry that question >> I don't know >> I don't know what's That is a good question.

777
04:02:57.600 --> 04:03:30.000
>> Are we on the record now? >> Not yet. >> Not yet. >> Your mics still. >> Apparently, you're being live streamed. Not sure why the producer can't kill the mics, but >> we got one of the kindergart remember a long time ago when Liam

778
04:03:30.000 --> 04:03:46.080
brought us a cookie whenever we were in Date City till six o'clock. >> Yeah. The staff's not what it used to be. >> Delicious. >> Denise used to get those muffins like a Florida cracker.

779
04:03:46.080 --> 04:04:01.600
>> That's not very thoughtful. >> The good old days. >> Yeah, we gave you all morning to do it. >> I know. I had >> Well, he's changed. He's changed sides of the table. >> Yeah, I know. Well, I had said she made dessert. So, >> thanks.

780
04:04:01.600 --> 04:05:52.359
>> Problem is that was at 5:00. She already ate it. I did. I went upstairs and ate everything. I can't I always get a kick out of your code says and your code says. >> Yeah, but you wrote the code.

781
04:05:57.920 --> 04:06:22.760
It's always yours. >> My mother-in-law always >> uses that your term when she's talking about my wife's father. Your father >> when I said one of your kids. >> Yeah, that's right. Your kids. See what your kids did.

782
04:06:29.120 --> 04:07:43.520
That's right. Just got a text from River Ridge said that backpacks are not allowed at school next week. Why are they school? Jeez. Four minutes a day. No, six minutes a day. Two minutes in the beginning, four minutes at the end of the day or vice

783
04:07:43.520 --> 04:09:04.439
versa. Instead of starting at 710 minutes, but not the sign. >> Yeah, right. She had all the time. >> How about Right.

784
04:09:16.160 --> 04:09:57.080
So far, >> when I when I went outside, a couple of residents meally, called me a You know that's so I I explain to the residents that our job is to consistency.

785
04:09:57.840 --> 04:10:30.560
>> Yeah. They got >> in the bathroom. >> That's why I waited till the meeting started back up to go. >> You should have told me that. >> I waited. >> Seriously? >> I was like, I'm just gonna wait.

786
04:10:30.560 --> 04:11:29.640
>> Yeah. What did they tell her? New Jersey go upstairs. So the state compensated me, but I drove control. >> You said you discriminator exclusionary state.

787
04:11:38.640 --> 04:12:14.399
Well, sure. >> Um, well, I wasn't involved in the court case. I was on that committee. Do you have any more of those turkeys? >> Want some? >> Feel free. >> Is it spicy or not spicy?

788
04:12:14.399 --> 04:13:31.680
>> Green is spicy. All right. >> Spicy. No, >> I'm hungry. >> Usually eat till >> I started Everybody's having dinner. >> This is where I bring He's

789
04:13:31.680 --> 04:14:19.600
like this. >> Oh boy. >> My dad's >> What's that? >> My dad's >> Oh, me too. >> Pull it out. >> Well, I know. >> Fine. Just give it a couple more

790
04:14:19.600 --> 04:15:03.840
minutes. I thought this would be the easiest chapter in the book, but I'm going home. >> You say that out loud to somebody, >> right? I never noticed that chair was different.

791
04:15:03.840 --> 04:16:06.479
>> I never noticed that chair was different. in the city. It's the same chair. >> Yeah. What? >> What? >> I'm a I'm a land rapist. >> I was in outside land.

792
04:16:06.479 --> 04:16:31.920
>> By who? >> From the resist. terms of actual official. >> Well, your job is no different than ours. It's just to make a recommendation. >> Terrifying. >> Nobody Nobody's got If these things were absolutely black and white, we wouldn't

793
04:16:31.920 --> 04:17:04.080
be having public hearings, >> right? They're black. If they're black and white, that's why we're here. >> It's also not Chuck your fault. You're >> right. >> That's right.

794
04:17:04.080 --> 04:17:46.560
>> Big time. ROI. >> Why we were looking for cookies? It's we think it's from the software. >> Oh, really? >> But it just their voices. It'll be good. >> So you So here's my here's my question.

795
04:17:46.560 --> 04:18:03.439
>> Honestly, because I'm curious. >> Are we still going to be on YouTube, though? >> Yes. >> So you'll still have that recording here. >> You're just not picking You're just not picking up our mics to your system, still >> 15. >> Are you recording the teams?

796
04:18:03.439 --> 04:18:24.640
>> Okay. So you'll have a sheriff's park outside my office for >> Yeah. So if you miss something, you can go back to YouTube and >> Pasco County YouTube. >> Wow. You know, >> you just type in YouTube. Interesting. Prior to 191st,

797
04:18:24.640 --> 04:18:40.640
1975, we didn't have a zoning, right? You could have built whatever you want. >> So you could have had a 100, but he could have built 10,000 houses. He could have done more. Whatever you want. >> I used to when I when I used to I would

798
04:18:40.640 --> 04:18:58.960
have somebody like hey >> well nobody knew what was >> I would send >> I was in >> so in 1975 it would have been nine years old >> they used to have the >> was everybody ready?

799
04:18:58.960 --> 04:19:15.120
>> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> You may begin. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, commissioners or plan commission members. Hi, Missile Planning, Development, Economic Growth. I know it's been a full afternoon,

800
04:19:15.120 --> 04:19:30.960
actually a full day already. So, thank you for sticking around so we can uh continue our progress through the Pasco 2050 comprehensive plan chapters. All right, back to my old trusty slide. So this morning we wrapped up the public

801
04:19:30.960 --> 04:19:46.800
facilities element, the second half of chapter 10. And as a quick reminder, the plan includes 11 chapters and we've already covered chapters 3 through 10. And that brings us to our next stop on

802
04:19:46.800 --> 04:20:02.479
the Pasco 2050 tour and that's Pasco Invest chapter 11. So let's take a quick look at Pasco Invest and all the updates that we had done so far. So what is Pasco Invest? Pasco Invest is the new name for our

803
04:20:02.479 --> 04:20:19.359
capital improvement element. This chapter is mandatory is a mandatory element of the comprehensive plan per chapter 163 of the Florida statutes. And it provides a it provides a unified framework for planning, prioritizing, and funding public facilities and

804
04:20:19.359 --> 04:20:34.560
infrastructure across the county. Um and that's done by identifying capital needs to meet adopted level of service standards uh prioritizing which improvements are funded and uh also linking land development decisions to

805
04:20:34.560 --> 04:20:49.840
available infrastructure. So what has changed in this update? First like we always do with all the chapters of past coach 20150 uh we have reorganized and streamlined the structure of the goals objectives and policies. The chapter now

806
04:20:49.840 --> 04:21:07.760
includes one goal, five objectives, and 50 policies, four of which are brand new. We have also made several key improvements. We moved relevant policies from the administrative ele uh elements into invests. We also removed outdated

807
04:21:07.760 --> 04:21:24.880
and redundant policies and the old capital improvement uh project schedules have also been deleted from this chapter. uh all the level of service standards policies formerly housed in other elements including the administrative elements, recreation open

808
04:21:24.880 --> 04:21:40.880
space element, uh transportation elements and public facilities elements as well as the public school facilities elements are now um consolidated within infest invest to make sure that we have convenient access and also consistency. So overall, these changes make the

809
04:21:40.880 --> 04:21:57.840
chapter more user friendly, up-to-date, and better aligned with both state requirements and our county goals. This slide shows the proposed four new policies. Um these policies are proposed to um strengthen to be added to the comp

810
04:21:57.840 --> 04:22:13.840
plan or to this chapter to strengthen how we manage growth and infrastructure funding um in the county. So, first policy invest 1112 and policy invest 1113. Uh, both of these policies ensure that our county continues to implement

811
04:22:13.840 --> 04:22:30.479
and regularly update impact fees for both fire combats and rescue and the library services. This means that as new development occurs, um, it helps pay for the additional fire stations, emergency equipments, and library facilities needed to serve our growing community.

812
04:22:30.479 --> 04:22:46.560
The second policy that we have added is invest 1.2.8. So this new policy streamlines how we update our capital improvement schedules instead of embedding the entire five-year um uh schedule directly into

813
04:22:46.560 --> 04:23:03.040
the chapter which would require a comprehensive plan amendment every single year. They the schedules get updated. We are now incorporating the schedule by reference. Um this policy allows us to update the data and analysis document where the schedules

814
04:23:03.040 --> 04:23:19.199
now reside. It's important to note that the capital improvements uh schedule um currently in the comp plan has have not been updated since 2010. So this policy is a significant step towards ensuring that um we are

815
04:23:19.199 --> 04:23:35.359
consistent or the comp plan is consistent um with the annually um updated um uh CIP schedule or the capital improvement schedule. The third policy that um or the fourth policy that we have added is policy invest 1.3.10.

816
04:23:35.359 --> 04:23:50.479
This new policy was developed in response to state requirements for local government to study and plan for septic to sewer conversions. While this requirement is for the feasibility studies, this one well this policy is already addressed in invest in the Pasco

817
04:23:50.479 --> 04:24:07.279
serves. Um it is here to ensure that the county um develops a funding plan which considers all the funding um sources such as grants, utility fee, uh state and federal programs and adjustment to any local fee structure. So that way

818
04:24:07.279 --> 04:24:24.479
we're ready to move forward with these important projects that we have identified in the feasibility study. And next slide um pretty much just shows the policies that we have relocated from

819
04:24:24.479 --> 04:24:40.800
other chapters to this chapter. I'm not going to go through each and every one of them, but I summarized them all in this table just to pretty much shows you what the policy number is and where it came from.

820
04:24:40.800 --> 04:24:56.159
And I did that, Mr. Moody, would you in mind because you had asked me when we discussed Pasco serves where those policies were going to go. So this is to pretty much showcase where those policies have moved to in this

821
04:24:56.159 --> 04:25:22.239
element or in this chapter. I can open the floor for you gentlemen to discuss any policy that you would like a little bit more um explanation on or more discussions.

822
04:25:22.239 --> 04:25:42.000
>> Um, yeah, I just had a question. So, I guess I'm curious. So, for So, for roads, parks, water, sewer, solid I think solid waste. >> Yep.

823
04:25:42.000 --> 04:26:00.000
Um you have the level of service standards that you put in here >> is fine in schools. >> Okay. >> Um for fire when you added fire rescue and libraries you didn't put a level service standard

824
04:26:00.000 --> 04:26:16.880
in. So what was the thought process there? >> So we do not have level adopted level of service standards for fire and libraries. The thought process of adding those two policies um into this chapter

825
04:26:16.880 --> 04:26:31.840
is pretty much just to ensure we have impact fees loss, but we just want to make sure that we're continuing with the implementation and updating of of those um impact fees. But currently there are

826
04:26:31.840 --> 04:26:51.120
no adopted level of service standards for fire and libraries. The the problem is the policies you've added refer to levels of service >> for impact fees. >> So by by levels of service you mean the impact fee levels of service.

827
04:26:51.120 --> 04:27:17.040
>> Correct. Yes. >> Because obviously you don't mean the complaint levels of service because there are none in here. H9. Yes. Yep. We discussed these policies with fire and libraries and they pretty much um

828
04:27:17.040 --> 04:27:34.479
were the ones that showed interest in having these policies in the comp plan. >> I don't I don't have a problem with them being in there. I just don't know since you didn't add any levels of service >> right >> to the comp plan. I don't I don't know what the reference to needed to maintain

829
04:27:34.479 --> 04:27:52.560
levels of service is referring to since there's no levels of service >> lever service for impact. >> There's no levels like all the other infrastructures >> have a level of service in the comp plan. So I if they if you asked me what

830
04:27:52.560 --> 04:28:08.800
the levels of service for parks, schools, water and sewer and drainage and everything else, I I could point to something >> correct. But for for the two you added for fire and libraries, there's a reference to levels of

831
04:28:08.800 --> 04:28:24.640
service, but I would have no idea what that is because there's no corresponding >> level of service standards for >> something added to the comp plan. So you would either need to add a level of service to the comp plan for those

832
04:28:24.640 --> 04:28:42.479
or you need to say what level level of service you're referring to. So is it is the level of service in the impact fee study? >> Correct. Yes, that's exactly what it's referring to. >> Well, then it needs to say that.

833
04:28:42.479 --> 04:28:58.880
>> Okay. >> In like in the most recent impact fee study. I guess that's whatever that's what the reference was supposed to I'm assuming you somebody intentionally did not want to put it in the comp plan. I guess I I

834
04:28:58.880 --> 04:29:16.479
I don't know. I wasn't part of these conversations. But if somebody intentionally did not want to put them in the comp plan, then you need to say what level of you're talking about.

835
04:29:16.479 --> 04:29:33.040
So the sentence would would uh read for both well it would say to maintain levels of service >> as outlined >> as outlined in the most recent impact you study and support future growth

836
04:29:33.040 --> 04:29:49.359
>> or as identif. >> Yeah I mean the only complicating factor is my understanding is that the most recent impact fee study for libraries was never adopted. Well, then does that mean that whoever's study can just >> So, I'm not sure that's accurate for

837
04:29:49.359 --> 04:30:06.239
libraries. >> Yeah, >> it is for fire, >> right? >> Does that be that was actually adopted? I just don't know if that's >> We don't have to say >> adopted in the most rec in an impact fee study for libraries. >> But do we have to say adopted?

838
04:30:06.239 --> 04:30:22.399
>> I guess you in the most recently >> adopted impact fee study. I guess if it said that. >> Okay. Why can't you just define a level of service? >> Well, I that would be the other thing. You could just put the adopted level of

839
04:30:22.399 --> 04:30:39.279
service in the comp plan. I But >> I mean, it is a little odd to me that you have the adopted level service for everything else in the comp plan, but you chose not to put >> What seems a bit bothersome is if you want to say it's the level of service in the most recent adopted impact fee,

840
04:30:39.279 --> 04:30:55.600
>> it's going to require study more. Well, that means every time I do an impact fee study, I can just decide change whatever level of service I want for to be convenient to justify the impact fee I wish to collect. >> Well, that was one rationale and

841
04:30:55.600 --> 04:31:12.800
internal discussions is providing some kind of flexibility so that if a level of service needed to be adjusted, you didn't have to do a whole comprehensive plan amendment to send it to Tallahassee for their approval. >> Yeah. that you but for all the other

842
04:31:12.800 --> 04:31:33.840
infrastructure facilities they're embedded in the complaint >> but I think some those other ones are statemandated >> whereas a library and a fire >> are not statemandated >> they're not I I don't look I I'm not been part of

843
04:31:33.840 --> 04:31:54.239
all these conversations all I'm saying is that you can't reference a level of service and then not say what it you either need to put that level of service in the comp plan or be more specific as to what you mean. >> I guess one of the questions I have is

844
04:31:54.239 --> 04:32:09.600
what's the problem? You want to define a level of service for fire and hopefully we don't want to decrease that level of service. We only want to increase that level of service. How long does it take us to do a comp

845
04:32:09.600 --> 04:32:24.560
plan amendment to increase a level of service for fire and send it off to the state? >> I mean, >> how burdensome is that? >> We come here every two weeks to do comp plan amendments.

846
04:32:24.560 --> 04:32:41.199
>> The comprehensive plan amendment process in this case would be a text amendment which would require three public hearings. uh the preparation of the necessary data and analysis for the change you're going to make. So, there's some kind of study is going to take place, the public

847
04:32:41.199 --> 04:32:56.319
hearing at the LPA, a transmitt hearing by the board at the board of county commissioners, a 30-day built-in or more waiting period for the state to review, then another adoption hearing by the board of county commissioners, and then

848
04:32:56.319 --> 04:33:14.959
a 40 plus day effective date time period associated with it. So it drags out. It could get six months and more >> to drive faster. >> Two and two and a half of those months are just state review

849
04:33:14.959 --> 04:33:31.920
to which I would also say that you know the pendulum swings. Back in the day you had a state review that was very uh involved. Uh then the state review wasn't as involved. And now I'm not saying that they're not involved, but neither am I saying that

850
04:33:31.920 --> 04:33:47.520
they are involved. They're they're producing more comments than the DEEO days. Let's put it that way. And the other thing to that we talked about internally was, you know, what would happen if you had another Senate

851
04:33:47.520 --> 04:34:05.561
Bill 180 scenario creating legislation that's more burdenome and restrictive. And if you're behind the ball on say parks, which historically the county was behind the ball on park impact fees, you try to increase it,

852
04:34:06.000 --> 04:34:21.359
you could run into challenges. >> To be clear, we still have some 180 isn't going to work, >> right? True. Yes. Yes. I'm thinking about the future, but yes. So that's where for fire rescue and for libraries because they're not statemandated to be in the comprehensive

853
04:34:21.359 --> 04:34:38.799
plan. The idea was to potentially give the board of county commissioners a little bit more flexibility on local home rule type things. >> Seems reasonable. >> I'll defer to whatever you all decide.

854
04:34:38.799 --> 04:34:55.279
I'm my only point is you can't just leave that. We can we can >> or some reference to what level service D standing you're talking about just not going to be in the comp plan. >> Yeah, we can specify it. I think the language where we've left it now says something to the effect of to maintain

855
04:34:55.279 --> 04:35:12.719
levels of service as identified in the most recently adopted impact fee study and support future growth. Um then my other question is there there's a couple pl so so it's very clear that the roadway levels of

856
04:35:12.719 --> 04:35:37.279
service are not concurrency standards and it's very clear to me that the school levels of service are concurrency standards but for everything else it's they're not really labeled so I labeled as concurrency or not.

857
04:35:37.279 --> 04:35:54.799
>> Do we use them for concurrency or not? So, do we need like is there somewhere that >> or is that is do we just do that through the land development code? like how do I know? I guess what I'm where I'm going with this is

858
04:35:54.799 --> 04:36:11.840
we decided for roads and schools to specifically label them as non-concurrency and concurrency. >> Mhm. >> Is there a reason we didn't do that with everything else? Like to make it clear that it is or is not a concurrency standard?

859
04:36:11.840 --> 04:36:29.920
No, there was no reason >> because I think my understanding is that that some of these are in fact like drainage, solid waste, waste water, audible water

860
04:36:29.920 --> 04:36:49.279
that some of these are in fact concurrency standards. If that's true, are we is there any harm to actually labeling them as concurrency standards like we did for schools? >> I don't think so. >> Yeah, there's no harm in doing that.

861
04:36:49.279 --> 04:37:04.000
It's >> I mean, you're right. They're they're being planned and discussed as they're proposing their projects. So, >> current. I'm just and now that we're adding fire and

862
04:37:04.000 --> 04:37:19.760
libraries, I'm just saying which I'm assuming there are not going to be concurrency standards. So I'm just saying we should be crystal clear as to what if we're putting a level of service standard in the comp plan. I think we should be crystal clear as to which ones are concurrency standards and which ones are not.

863
04:37:19.760 --> 04:37:39.039
>> Okay. >> So the the water infrastructure and wastewater infrastructure and that will be concurrency. Same thing with drainage. >> I Well, I think the land development code is clear. I mean, you can look in the land development code, but I believe I'm pretty sure parks, drainage,

864
04:37:39.039 --> 04:37:59.039
water, sewer. Look at the land of code. Pretty sure parks, drainage, water, sewer, and solid waste are all concurrency public facilities. But you can look at the land development code to confirm. But it's all the ones that are required by state law, which I >> believe are all the ones I just said.

865
04:37:59.039 --> 04:38:23.119
>> Concurrency. >> Okay. >> We we do all the ones that are required by state law. >> Yeah. >> Then >> the only optional one that we do, I guess, is schools. >> What? It's Yeah, >> it's not necessarily optional, but Okay.

866
04:38:23.119 --> 04:38:47.840
So I'm just I just refer that you be crystal clear that which ones are concurrency standards and which ones are not. >> Okay. Sure. We'll add that. Looking at the standards for portable water and wastewater.

867
04:38:47.840 --> 04:39:02.240
Wastewater is a little bit better because it talks about equivalent residential units within Pasco County. But I think that's a bit It should be residential units within the utility service area. >> What page are you on, sir? >> Uh it's 114116.

868
04:39:02.240 --> 04:39:20.000
It's page six of the red line. Top of the page about capacity of both portable water and wastewater. So it should be per day per equivalent res residential unit within the utility service area. I think is probably we need to add to both of those.

869
04:39:20.000 --> 04:39:42.718
>> Okay. I'm not sure why on 116 it's each new residential equivalent or each new equivalent residential unit. I'm not sure why the word news there should probably be for each. >> Yeah. I mean that was reviewed by

870
04:39:42.718 --> 04:40:15.920
wastewater staff and they added new but we can mention like right here 116 the new the new the word new Okay, those are noted. Mr. Mons,

871
04:40:15.920 --> 04:40:34.240
>> 118. We got a couple questions, >> of course. >> Can somebody tell me where the Pesco County Stormwater Management Practices Manual lives today? >> Well, I've been here a long time and I've never ever seen one. About

872
04:40:34.240 --> 04:40:49.280
10 years ago, there was discussions about revisions or making that and that died. And I don't know that I've heard that it came back. >> Right now, the storm water rules and the land development code say that our rules are the same rules in effect at SwiftMUD

873
04:40:49.280 --> 04:41:04.718
in December whatever 2011. That's 16 years ago, 15 years ago. And by the way, the rules had a massive change on December 28th of last year. >> So,

874
04:41:04.718 --> 04:41:26.080
>> no, nobody's online. >> She's available. >> Is it on their website? >> I don't think it exists, Terry. Was not I've never seen >> Terry. I've practiced here a long time. I have never seen a storm water manual in this county.

875
04:41:26.080 --> 04:41:43.120
>> Probably probably wasn't a fair question. >> I probably should have worded. >> Was that it was a trick >> deal in storm water? >> Yeah. Was that a trick question? Mr. Gerardy. >> Yeah. >> At 3:00. That would have been the world. >> I think existed and we could just simply

876
04:41:43.120 --> 04:42:00.480
strike it from >> take away his chomp. >> What happens when you give him a chomp? I mean I think there's it's a whole separate issue but there is a lot of over duplicate review when it comes to storm water >> water management district enforces D

877
04:42:00.480 --> 04:42:15.600
rules. >> Is this section required by the state law >> the >> you do have drainage is one required concurrency facility. >> Yes. >> But you the reference to that manual is

878
04:42:15.600 --> 04:42:33.120
not required by state law. Um, >> but you need to have a drainage. >> You need to have a level of service standard for drainage. But it could just be a reference to Swift Mud standards. >> I mean, I'm okay if you just strike the storm water practices manual.

879
04:42:33.280 --> 04:42:49.120
Well, I think that would be wise >> because one, to Jaime's point, we already have a state agency that's charged with,

880
04:42:49.120 --> 04:43:06.878
you know, managing storm water. You've got to get that permit. For whatever reason, our county has not been able to update its rules or keep a staff that's actually capable of

881
04:43:06.878 --> 04:43:27.760
doing the analysis required to make sure those rules are complied with. Why don't we just defer that to the state and save our local taxpayers the money and time? There's a duplication of That's unnecessary. And if your local rule is

882
04:43:27.760 --> 04:43:44.638
going to be, if you look at the storm water rules and our land development code says our storm water rules are the rules in effect at swift mud on whatever December 2011. Well, why would then why do we need to have rules? We're using their rules and

883
04:43:44.638 --> 04:44:01.440
they do it. Why do we need to have them? Doesn't make any sense. Okay, >> I think making that decision is not my pay grade. >> I just moved the point. >> Well, they're they're saying two

884
04:44:01.440 --> 04:44:18.920
different things. Mr. Mr. Jardy is just suggesting striking the reference to the storm water management. >> I agree with him because there isn't one or has been. >> Mr. Moody is suggesting also striking the reference to the land development code which is a bigger request.

885
04:44:20.080 --> 04:44:35.680
because it's unnecessary. >> But that would effectively require us to repeal the land development code, too. >> No, you just repeal that section of the land development. >> Repeal that section of the land development code. >> It's kind of what is after. >> Well, I mean, if it

886
04:44:35.680 --> 04:44:50.638
>> that's the part that's above Terry's pay grade. I don't think I don't think striking the reference to the manual is above Terry's pay grade if it doesn't exist. >> No, I can't get a promotion. Right. Um I mean if the if the landed on code

887
04:44:50.638 --> 04:45:07.680
continues to be referenced here but the code provisions are updated to point to the >> swift >> swift mud or whoever yeah regulation >> I could be fine with that too but we got to get on with it.

888
04:45:07.680 --> 04:45:23.200
>> We're talking about 15 years right now. >> 15 years behind. Well, I mean there will be following the comprehensive plan update as part of the communist strategic plan uh land development update through which the tables the change tables that you see here that

889
04:45:23.200 --> 04:45:39.040
you've been getting at the workshop are not the end of the road. Um you'll notice that on the on the far right end of the table there's land development code section updates. So with all the changes that are happening in the comprehensive plan, we're going to go

890
04:45:39.040 --> 04:45:55.760
through and identify the code sections following as an exercise and then we're going to be going to the constituent departments and telling them, hey, you guys got to update your parts of the land development code here. So that's going to be a big question that probably requires a bit more higher level

891
04:45:55.760 --> 04:46:13.200
discussion before it filters down into a into department adjustments to the land development code. But I I think my recommendation for this policy is keep the reference to the land development code and to the extent that the land

892
04:46:13.200 --> 04:46:32.240
development code then is updated to point in the right direction. I think that's what you would want to achieve during the land development update following the this governance plan update. Well, I would argue you should strike the reference to the manual anyway because if there even if there was a

893
04:46:32.240 --> 04:46:49.920
manual, that's where something is probably be addressed in the land development code, not the comp plan. Okay. Okay. Next sentence. All new. Then in parenthesis it's the

894
04:46:49.920 --> 04:47:10.240
word to include stricken retrofit and redevelopment buildings, roads and sites. What is that saying? That all new development including but that word struck. Is that saying that new is defined as

895
04:47:10.240 --> 04:47:26.160
retrofit and redevelopment? What about brand new development? It's just confusing to me. >> Is it suggesting that the buildings and the roads and the sites that come out of retrofits and redevelopment are considered new?

896
04:47:26.160 --> 04:47:45.360
>> But so then table invest two doesn't cover new development. >> It covers all buildings. >> I I see the confusion though. >> It is confusing. >> Yeah. or maybe new comma retrofit and

897
04:47:45.360 --> 04:48:05.280
develop redevelopment. I don't know. >> Well, if it's new development, retrofit and redevelopment, then isn't that all development? >> That cover it all. >> That covers everything. >> We should just say all new buildings, roads, and sites,

898
04:48:05.280 --> 04:48:21.920
>> right? Whether it's a retrofitted or redeveloped. >> Well, why? But to Mr. From Moody's point, why isn't it just saying all development? Like what what is it ex what is it not covering? >> All buildings, roads, and sites.

899
04:48:21.920 --> 04:48:39.840
>> I guess it's grandfathering all the existing buildings, roads, and sites, >> right? >> But at what point does new begin? >> I guess the compact. That's a that's a that's a debate because without getting into too much specifics

900
04:48:39.840 --> 04:49:03.120
and David Engel is involved in this, but we're going to have to fix what the definition of development is in our land development code >> because right now it's being interpreted in ways that it was never intended.

901
04:49:03.120 --> 04:49:20.400
delete new and then delete also retrofit >> so everything it doesn't matter >> I think that I believe I'm hearing from one from the LPA here that the sentence should read all buildings roads and sites shall meet the design criteria

902
04:49:20.400 --> 04:49:36.080
outlined in tables to to clean up the sentence >> well I I want to hold on >> yeah because I I don't think we're saying that >> the problem no >> existing needs to be brought Correct. Because the problem that I have is in that our definition of

903
04:49:36.080 --> 04:49:51.600
development, a change of use of that building constitutes development. >> Okay. Sorry. >> Okay. So, if I go in and I take a building and I change it from a retail store into a restaurant by that and you

904
04:49:51.600 --> 04:50:08.160
trigger a storm water review, that's not necessary. Yeah, >> I I understood if I expanded the building or expanded the parking, but if I just simply changed the use. >> Yeah, you don't want to do that, >> right? That's why I said we're working

905
04:50:08.160 --> 04:50:25.040
on that. That needs to get fixed in our >> What if it said all new development or redevelopment as defined in the land development code? >> Well, right now that would include changing the use of the building, >> but we could change that in the land development code. Yeah, just as I'm

906
04:50:25.040 --> 04:50:46.878
suggesting we should change the storm water regulations that are 15 years out of date. >> What I'm saying is that gives you the flexibility to change the definition of redevelopment and land development code. >> Right. >> So is that to say all new development and redevelopment of buildings, roads

907
04:50:46.878 --> 04:51:03.120
and sites? >> No. All development is defined by the land development code. So then that gives the opportunity in the land development code we can decide what is and what is not development. >> Let's not put the word development in there >> right.

908
04:51:03.120 --> 04:51:20.480
>> So so that means >> I think would read all development and you could put in parenthesis as defined in the land development code close parenthesis >> I guess. Do you want to leave you want to say all buildings, roads and sites?

909
04:51:20.480 --> 04:51:37.120
You want to leave that in? >> Is that >> Oh, no. Actually, I think that your first is all development as defined in the land development code. >> Yeah. >> Just don't tell me criteria. Yeah. >> All right. Let me let me just say that all development as defined in development. >> Right. Because then he defines different

910
04:51:37.120 --> 04:52:06.160
standards for buildings, roads. >> Right. True. Yeah. Okay. You're right. Yeah, you're right. shall meet >> the criteria in the table. >> Yes. All this taken up. >> Okay.

911
04:52:06.160 --> 04:52:22.080
>> Okay. Then then my next question goes to the table itself. I'm assuming these standards all came from the existing comp plan. >> Yes. >> Existing comp plan and what's in the LDC right now. >> Maintained by the constituent

912
04:52:22.080 --> 04:52:38.798
departments that reviewed it. >> Yes. >> I just I mean I guess they're in place. We're not changing anything, but I have trouble following the wording. You know, the example I'll give you. First one says emergency shelters shall

913
04:52:38.798 --> 04:52:53.280
be designed to accomodate. Does it mean they can handle it? I mean, it can come in the doors and go out the doors. Is there not a standard for emergency shelters built above just like there is for habitable structures

914
04:52:53.280 --> 04:53:11.200
where it's supposed to be one foot above 100ear flood elevation. Um I've I've never seen I've never seen it defined as like a level of service where they can accommodate it. I mean, usually it's up to a certain

915
04:53:11.200 --> 04:53:26.638
>> Yeah. What does that mean? I agree. What does that mean? Accommodate a minimum 100year storm event in 24hour peak duration >> to deal with it. I don't >> Well, no. It should say something,

916
04:53:26.638 --> 04:53:41.200
Terry. I think what the intent is is that it should say something to the effect of that the emergency shelters shall be located at such an elevation such that it will not flood during a

917
04:53:41.200 --> 04:53:57.360
100year storm event with 24-hour peak duration. >> Yeah. I mean I I think when they look for like an EOC or something like that, I mean there's certain standards that they look for and certain properties I think are ruled out when they're looking for those sites. >> Yes, that's correct. I just think that just needs to be

918
04:53:57.360 --> 04:54:19.040
better defined. >> Just I'm just looking at the second one. All habitable structure shall be designed to accommodate a minimum 100red-year storm event, 24-hour duration. Okay. Well, does that mean the building won't implode during that event or it won't get wet? I mean, it says finished floor elevation shall be 1 foot

919
04:54:19.040 --> 04:54:40.320
above the 100year elevation, but >> well, and then there's you have two two terms in the same box. 100year storm 24-hour duration and 100year flood elevation are

920
04:54:40.320 --> 04:54:56.560
not necessarily the same thing. and she deferred me to somebody else. >> And this is exactly why we should get rid of doing storm water in the county because it takes a certain level of expertise,

921
04:54:56.560 --> 04:55:11.680
>> which is what the state agency has. >> But these are not standards. These are just designer. >> Should these standards live in the land development code anyway? >> Sorry. >> Should these standards live in the land development code anyway? Should they be

922
04:55:11.680 --> 04:55:34.638
here in the comp plan? Well, I think here you're trying to define what the minimum level of service is. >> Right. We sounds like we have to define what

923
04:55:34.638 --> 04:55:52.638
accommodate is meaning in each of these. >> I mean I I think this whole level of service section needs to be looked at. I'm not suggesting the material change to it but I mean I think I would guess and I don't know exactly the dates of the history. I know there's also

924
04:55:52.638 --> 04:56:10.160
there's other closed basin criteria based on the special concern criteria. >> There's other things and everything in here's lumped. Are those really all the same for every I mean you start to get into the road level service starts talking about evacuation routes arterials neighborhood collector roads

925
04:56:10.160 --> 04:56:26.798
it gives a less than or equal to six inches of depth on the outside edge of pavement that starts to get pretty specific >> yeah and I don't understand the one for sites the standard says flooding refers to standing water in agricultural land developed open or green space yards and parking lots and undeveloped lands

926
04:56:26.798 --> 04:56:43.520
designated for future development this does does not include areas incorporated into the storm water basin master plan as flowways, flood planes, flood storage areas. Okay. Well, what's the standard? That just defined what flooding was. >> Probably should mention that. >> It's a good point. That's not a

927
04:56:43.520 --> 04:57:09.600
standard. >> So, the we're going to check the land development code really quick on >> It's 15 years out of date. >> Check the land development code. See what it says. >> What's ponding on the roadway? Should be

928
04:57:09.600 --> 04:57:34.240
less than 6 in to make it pass. What's ponding? >> No pond. >> I mean, can we come back and continue this workshop? in the morning. You >> mean next month?

929
04:57:34.240 --> 04:57:50.320
>> We we would recommend uh the if we're going to if there's a request for continuence, we would not recommend the June 11 because it's a pretty heavy meeting so far. Um probably looking at the June or

930
04:57:50.320 --> 04:58:07.440
excuse me, July 9 for invests. >> Okay. If if that's at the pleasure of the board, >> we're not actually in a hearing, but yes. So, >> let's make a motion anyway. >> I'll second the non motion motion.

931
04:58:07.440 --> 04:58:25.958
>> Okay. >> All right. All in favor? >> I can't say you didn't know about it. >> I I >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. Thanks guys and gals.

932
04:58:26.080 --> 04:58:51.760
That was about my third. >> I know. We have motion to adjourn now that we're continued. >> Their computers are dead. >> You're more than welcome to take. >> All right. >> I'll recover from the CNU last week.

933
04:58:52.400 --> 04:59:13.240
He was in bed all >> he was stomach. >> What' you give him David? >> What? >> We're as you give him David. >> He's not going to get paid.

934
04:59:14.000 --> 04:59:41.440
>> I was supposed to start my vacation two hours ago. >> I think I think we're done. We had enough technology issues. Thank you. I appreciate that. >> I'm going to tell him tomorrow morning. Everybody day