[Music] John, you ready? [Music] I'd like to call the meeting to order. If we would uh stand for a moment of silence and the pledge of allegiance,
please. I allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. Okay, I'd like to welcome everybody
today. If we would have the roll call, please. Madam clerk. >> Jamie Gerardi >> here. >> Christopher P >> here. >> John Moody >> here. >> Matthews. >> Derek >> here. >> Richard Tanelloo >> here. >> Chairman Charles Gray
>> here. >> And proof of publication, please. The items are advertised in the Tampa Bay Times on September 3rd, 2025, October 1st, 2025, and October 5th, 2025, or by affidavit of certified mailing list.
>> All right. Thank you very much. Like to welcome everybody again today and give you a brief uh account of what we're going to do today. We're planning commission. We're appointed by the board of county commissioners. We meet twice monthly. We serve as a local planning
agency to the board of county commissioners and re and re make recommendations on comprehensive plan amendments, land development code amendments, reszonings and conditional use requests. The plan commission is the final decision making body for special
exceptions, certain appeals and variance requests, certain alternative standard requests. However, any decisions we make here today may be appealed to the board of county commissioners. Anyone is in opposition to any land development uh approval
uh or planning comm or uh any item where the planning commission transmits a recommendation to the board of county commissioners, it'd be important for you to attend the appropriate county commission meeting. Those you're not familiar with the contents of the meetings, we have three sections,
continuences, consent items, and regular items. It's been our custom to to grant continuences to the applicant or to the staff uh if they're making a recommendation to continue unless
they're extenduating circumstances. Um otherwise they will um be passed on today and uh then followed by consent. We go through the consent consent items one at a time. As we raise the consent items as you you hear them
read, we will um ask if there's anyone here to object. If there is, we'll be happy to pull it from consent and put it in with the regular items. And those are the items will be fully heard today. And um
the applicants will have five minutes to present their uh request. and anybody in the audience who has questions about the application will have three minutes to ask those questions. Uh then the the applicant will have an opportunity to come back up and and try to answer the
questions. Um if there's been a request for extra time uh at least 24 hours prior to this meeting in writing um do we have any for requests for extra time? Uh we do not
have requests for any additional time, Mr. Chair. We I would also like to note we don't have anybody signed up on WebEx, but we do have individuals signed up for general public comment today. >> Okay. All right. So, um I'll say that uh before we start the regular meeting,
we're going to open it up to public comment for anything that's not on today's agenda. But before we start, I'm going to ask everyone to please uh if you have a phone or something that makes noise, please put on the silent position so you don't interrupt anybody when they're speaking.
And um then and also let's everybody stand who tends to give testimony today, please stand, raise your right hand, and be sworn. Everybody that plans to come up and speak, >> do you swear for the testimony you're
about to give the truth? So help God. All right. Thank you. So before, as I said, before we start the meeting, I think uh uh there's someone here that wants to speak on something that's not on today's agenda, whoever that is, feel free to come up,
state your name and address, please, and state your concerns. Julia Bartunic, 2645 Meadowwood Drive, New Paritchi, Florida 34655. And uh thank you for this time. Um just touching base about the tree ordinance
and um just some input that it would be best to continue to do it decisively and in a segmented way. and the um consensus with three out of five of the county commissioners being four. Uh the the
July 15th uh uh or piece of of the new ordinance is very very important um that that continues through and also uh Mr. Moody's recommendation for 30 for a 20% tree canopy with incentives for
developers. Um, we'd like to see that increased to a 30% tree canopy preservation. Other counties are reaching out. They're very excited about Pasco's tree ordinance and beautiful Pasco County needs to set precedents for
the entire state of Florida. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you very much. Any questions of the speaker? If not, uh, John, do you have any comment or anybody up here have any comment about the three ordinance? I'll just say that staff is working on
it. Staff is listening to the planning commission, >> right? Yeah, it's something that we're all very interested in. So, we're we're on top of that one, I believe. Thank you for coming. Okay. Um I think we can start then,
Giana. >> Okay. Good afternoon, planning commission members. Gianna German, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Uh we have no items on continuence today. The first item that is on consent is item PC1. It's a special exception in the name of Sharp
Image Resolutions, Inc. Uh 5036 Trouble Creek to allow for an adult daycare center in an R4 Highdensity Residential District in southwest Pasco County at the southwest corner of the intersection of Trouble Creek Road and Terry Loop containing approximately 0.15
acres. And this is coming with the recommendation of approval with conditions from the planning development and economic growth department. >> All right. Is the applicant present? >> Anyone here to object? >> The applicant want to make any comment?
No. Okay. Let's go to the next one then. >> The next item is item PC2, a zoning amendment in the name of CL Shady Hills MPUD, 499 Acres, Inc. for a change in zoning from C2 general commercial
district to an MPU master plan unit development district to allow for the development of 160 town home units and associated infrastructure on approximately 24.11 acres located on the east side of Shady Hills Road approximately 720 ft south of the
intersection of Shady Hills Road and County Line Road. There are now individuals signed up to speak on this item and staff asked that this be moved to the regular agenda. >> All right. Um then do I have a motion to move to regular agenda? >> So moved.
>> Second. >> Okay. All in favor. >> Okay. >> So we're moving PC2 for those of you in the audience. We're moving it to the regular agenda. >> Item PC3. I would like to note for this item that there was a conflict voting
form received submitted by planning commission member Gerardi who we will be abstaining from voting. Uh, this item is a zoning amendment in the name of Rowan Industrial MPU master plan unit development. Rowan Road LLC for a change in zoning from a PO2 professional office
district to an MPU master plan unit development to allow for the development of 2,000 square feet of I1 Park industrial uses and associ associated infrastructure, excuse me, on approximately
18 acres. And there are now individuals signed up to speak on this item as well and we ask that it be moved to the regular agenda. >> All right, Mr. >> Chair, we also received a revised condition of approval for this item. So if you can get a motion to receive and file the revised condition that was so
moved. >> Okay, >> second. >> We have a motion and we have a second. Any further discussion of the motion to receive and file? All in favor signify by saying I. >> I like sign. Okay, it'll be moved to the regular
agenda. Okay, anybody object? Okay, the next item is item PC4. You'll be sitting as the local planning agency for this item. It's PTE 260010, a small-cale comprehensive plan
amendment CPAS-210 CA properties comp plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to future land use maps 2-15 and sheet 20 changing from res 3 residential three dwelling units per acre to comm commercial on approximately 3.68 acres of real
property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Land of Lakes Boulevard and Wisteria Loop. And this is coming with the recommendation that the local planning agency find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan. >> All right. The applicant present.
>> Anyone here to object? Don't see any objections. Okay. Next. >> And the last item that we have on consent today is item PC5. You'll also be sitting as a local planning agency for this item. It's PTE 260027,
a smallcale comprehensive plan amendment CPA 25008 6230 stone road industrial providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 and sheet 10 changing from RO retail office
residential to IL industrial light on approximately 4.18 acres of real property located at the south side of Stone Road approximately 500 ft east of the intersection at US Highway 19 and Stone Road. And this is coming with the recommendation that the local planning
agency find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan. Anyone here to speak on this one? See no one. Okay. Move to recommend approval of the consent agenda consisting of items PC1,
PC4, and PC5. >> Second. >> Second. >> I have a motion. >> Two seconds. >> Two seconds. >> Two seconds. >> Two seconds. Um, all in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> Oppos. Like sign.
Okay. So, anybody that was involved in PC 1, four, or five, we voted to go, >> you're good to go. >> Okay. Good afternoon, planning commission. This is Robert Irving with
Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. The item before you today is the CL Shady Hills MPUD. It's PTE 267888. This is a proposed zoning amendment from a C2 general commercial district to an MPUD master plan unit development to
allow for the development of 160 plotted town homes and associated infrastructure on 24.1 acres. And the subject site is located on the east side of Shady Hills Road, approximately 720 ft south of the intersection of Shady Hills Road and County Line Road.
So, here's the subject site. It's located in the northwest corner of the county in the north market area. So, the subject site is located on the east side of Shady Hills Road, just south of Countyline Road. And to note, there is a low point on the northeastern
corner of the subject site, which the commercial developments that you'll see to the northern extent of Shady Hills Road currently drains to. And there's also a bare patch of land in the southwest corner that you'll see that provides existing drainage for the eastern side of Shady Hills Road.
Here's the zoning map, the existing zoning C2 general commercial district. And it's important to note that in 2015, there was a conditional use approved CU 1517 to allow for multif family dwelling units in a C2 general commercial
district. And this permitted MF2 multif family density multif family highdensity district which would permit a maximum density of 18 dwelling units per acre totaling 434 multif family dwelling units on the subject site. The
applicant's proposal today of 160 town homes would equate to a density of 6.7 resulting in a density decrease of approximately 11 units per acre. Here's the future land use which is RO retail office residential and would allow a
maximum of 24 dwelling units per acre. And here you'll see the master plan. So the MPUD will have one functional access located generally in the center with a secondary emergency access towards the southern boundary with pedestrian access. And the applicant will be constructing a 235 ft southbound left
turn lane. And you'll also see shaded in, I believe, orange on that master plan there, the applicant will be constructing an 8ft sidewalk along the project's frontage on the east side of Shady Hills Road. And the lot dimensions are shown in the bottom right hand corner. The town homes
will be 18t in width with 90 foot in depth. The minimum dimensions, let me correct that, with a max height of 45 ft. So here you'll see the binding concept plan that depicts the proposed layout of the 160 town home units. You'll see that 8ft sidewalk again shown. And
additionally on the northern park area on the subject site, you'll see pedestrian access to the 8oot sidewalk on the east side of Shady Hills Road. Um there'll be a type B buffer to the northeast and south. The town home units shall be limited to two to eight units
and no more than two stories. And another thing to note is a maximum of 50% of the total town home buildings within the development may consist of eight units and they of the 8-unit town home buildings, they shall not be constructed directly adjacent to another
8unit town home block. So here's a context map. So on the context map, you'll see Shady Hills Road just west of the subject site. And another thing to point out, the applicant additionally included a condition of approval for an off-site improvement for construction of an 8-ft
sidewalk from the project's southern boundary to the entrance to Shady Hills Elementary School along the eastern side of Shady Hills Road. You'll see that in that darker orange shown. And just to provide some overall context for the pedestrian network of the Shady Hills Road corridor, Dell Webb is constructing
an 8-ft path on both sides of Shady Hills Road from Canyon Ridge Road to Cruz Lake Drive. The county has plans to put a 5-ft sidewalk on the east side of Shady Hills Road, which is currently at 30% design and is anticipated to begin construction in fiscal year 26, spanning
from Cruz Lake to Bosley. So, what I'm driving at here is after this proposal, with the condition I just mentioned, there'll only be essentially two missing segments of eastern sidewalk from Bosley to the entrance to Shady Hills Elementary and then from the subject
sites northern 8-foot path to County Line Road. The applicant seeks a variation from LDC section 9016011 street access to adjoining property. The applicant requests not to provide an interconnect to the north south or east due to the
existing site conditions that make it not feasible to provide an interconnect. As I mentioned earlier, to the north of subject site, there's an existing onwater storm water router on-site storm water retention pond that prot provides retention for the sites to the north of subject site extending to the commercial uses that are located at the
intersection of Shady Hills Road and County Line Road, which will need to be modified to accommodate the proposed development. On the southern portion of this subject site, there's an existing storm water pond that serves the eastern side of Shady Hills Road and will need to be also modified for the new portions
of Shady Hills right away which will be dedicated and make an interconnect not feasible. To the east of the subject site, there's an existing power line and natural gas corridor which makes an interconnect not feasible. Given the site constraints, the public purpose of the southern pond accommodating
retention for the public rideway and the additional pedestrian connectivity added to facilitate circulation. PTE is amanable to the request and find that the requested variation meets the intent of the code. The applicant is also seeking a variation from LDC section 901.2I
transportation corridor management. The applicant proposes a variation to the rightway preservation table corridor width for Shady Hills Road from 166 feet to 124 ft. PTE has met with the applicant and the county engineer and at the advisement of the county engineer.
Revised the proposed dedication of rightway to 124 ft to accommodate a planned transition to a four-lane urban section as opposed to the existing proposed rural section with swelles as currently contemplated on the existing right-of-way preservation table. PTE is amanable to the request and finds that
the requested variation meets the intent of the code and this comes with the recommendation of approval with conditions for PTE. >> Okay. Thank you, Robert. Any questions for Robert? >> Yeah, just real quick. So, I I see the previous history on this um property has
uh on August 18th, 2015, there was a conditional use already approved for MF2 on this property. Correct. >> Could you just give me a little bit more of that background? Yeah. So I I think I have it here somewhere. So that was essentially just approved to allow for multif family
dwelling units. And as I mentioned earlier, that would be at an 18 unit density, >> right? >> Um so they could build up to >> I think I mentioned >> some >> Yeah. 400 and some odd multifamily units >> based on that acreage. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Anything else? Anyone? And how far did you say the sidewalks were >> um in width or where they're >> no the length that they're >> putting in along Shady Hills Road. >> So the segment that they're doing that's
on-site is just expanding the act it's just spanning from the actual project's frontage and then I believe in Barbara's presentation they actually have the actual linear square footage listed as to how far it's going to be from the project southern MPU boundary to Shady Hills Elementary.
Yeah, I believe it's roughly 2,300 square feet um >> linear >> linear feet. Sorry. Um for that portion that's expanding from the southern boundary to Shady Hills Elementary. >> That's a 5 foot wide sidewalk.
>> Um it's an 8 foot wide where feasible. >> And then do you know how long the frontage is on the property? >> Um I don't offh hand. I can find that out for you though. You looking that up, William? >> Yes, sir. >> You have it?
>> Nonetheless, it's a long way. Barbara Willilheight, 6327 Grand Boulevard, uh, Newport Richie for the applicant. I do have a short PowerPoint. >> Okay, great. >> And we're going to see who gets it first, Mr. Simino or Mr. Vmillion.
>> But anyhow, if you'd like for me to present in the meantime, um, to keep this moving, I'd be happy to. >> We're gonna give you the answer together. >> Oh, they're going to confer. >> Go ahead, Barbara. >> What a politician. >> I will. As soon as my PowerPoint comes up, I'll get going. >> Okay.
Okay. All right. So on behalf of the applicant, we're bringing this project forward. The current land use is ROR. Um, which allows a maximum density of, this is an eye test. I should have a printed one. 578 residential units. Um,
as a matter of the land use, it has both C2 zoning and then it has a conditional use that goes on top of the C2 zoning. So when you do a conditional use for multifamily, it's an additional use. It doesn't take away the commercial. So, it still has the property has commercial entitlements as well as entitlements for
multifamily. Um, staff says it's 18 units per acre. I think it's 24 units per acre. Still a lot of multi-unit f multi- family units that have been approved on this property. We're proposing to do an MPU that takes away the commercial zoning on this property
and the multifamily and replaces it with platted town homes which significantly significantly reduces the um transportation impact from the project. We also have as you can maybe see there um if you can see that there we we are
part of the solution for Shady Hills Road by the fact that we have to convey right ofway as I do in all my projects. We sit down, one of the first things we do is we sit down with staff and the county engineer and the county attorney and we go through what is your what do you want for this corridor? What is the needs for right of way? What
are we doing about off-site improvements? You know, those types of things. And so we've been working very closely from the beginning. And you'll see that variation that's to the um transformation corridor. I didn't come up with that. It was actually your your the county engineer who is updating all
of the tables um quarter preservation tables together with the 2015 2050 comp plan update. So we're getting that information and we're incorporating it into these projects so we have current information instead of using old information. As we mentioned, we're removing the this
zoning will remove the um as a matter of right ability to have apartments on this property. It also removes the C2 zoning on this property. We're proposing a maximum of 180 ply town homes. As I mentioned, we're reducing the traffic potential and
we're doing 6% of the of the project is going for um infrastructure for the rightway. We're building 20 2,300 linear feet of off-site 8 foot sidewalk to Shady Hills Elementary School. And we're doing on-site. Did the guys decide what the on-site is? The the portion, how
long is the portion along ours? >> 2,000. So between the two 4,300 linear feet of 8 foot sidewalks. The counties, I always say this and for county, the sidewalks that they're doing up to Bosley are five feet. all of my clients
along here with everything else you've heard that's being done is are all my clients um and they all committed to eight feet. So this is the binding concept plan. We were asked to do a binding concept plan for this project um and we we've
produced that as Rob mentioned. By the way, that was a really good presentation. Seen a lot of those in my 30 years and that's really good one by the way. Um these are the conditions that Rob went over. We're exceeding the PM26. the board's starting to say, "Let what about these eight unit town home buildings? We don't want to see all
these eights because they say they, you know, they line up and so how can we do that?" So we so we committed to a condition that says we only can have 50% of the units could be eights and then we have a monotony control on top of eights that say we can't have eights adjacent to eights. So that's something new. I I
bet we'll see that more and more in more um in more conditions of approval for town home projects. The other thing that we're exceeding is even though PM26 doesn't require it, we know that the board is looking for extra visitor parking. So, we have 0.25 spaces per unit. And what's significant about that
language is it says it's outside of the driveway and outside of the of the the driveway and the garage. Thank you. But your code doesn't necessarily require that. You can count the spaces in your in your driveway or your garage to meet
the visitor. Even though visitors can't go in other people's garages and driveways, my clients are all committed to this extra visitor parking which has been wellreceived by the board of county commissioners. This is um the trip generation. If you compare what's allowed on the property
as a matter of right pursuant to its zoning compared to the town homes and um we have uh Steve Henry here. One of the things I would say is because of this difference between the trip generation when you look at what's allowed versus what we're proposing, we did not have to
do a timing and phasing analysis. However, staff was like, we can't just not look at anything. So, what we did was we advanced our access management analysis so that we actually did an actual access management analysis at the time of zoning and submitted that. Um,
so there's that's the information that says here's what's going on with the intersection of Shady Hills and County Line, which there are no negative impacts. Um, but wanted to explain that we kind of went when you see that access management analysis in the in the documents, that's because we voluntarily
did more than what the code requires in connection with this resoning. This is the the talked about sidewalk um the off-site sidewalk, the 8 foot that goes from this project to um down to Shady Hills Elementary. I would say that something that's that was also done for
Shady Hills Elementary was before this school year, a client of mine partnered with the county for the county to do a 10,000 ft queuing lane um into Shady Hills Elementary, which is south of our sidewalk, then Shady Hills, and then this queuing lane is on the south side
of Shady Hills. So that what that did was it got traffic that was sitting in the right ofway in the travel lanes for Shady Hills over onto a queuing lane so that traffic no longer cues on the travel lane. Um so that's been an
improvement and it was done in about four months between when it was we were requested to do that and was constructed maybe five months between agreements and actual construction. So, I I know you're going to hear about Shady Hills Road and
and that and so forth, but I can tell you that the board is committed because I've had another reasonzoning. Maybe they'll reference um the board, county commissioners is committed. That's a priority and we're doing our part right away, off-site sidewalk. Um and then all
these other improvements that you hear that are going up and down along Shady Hills Road regarding pedestrians and queuing for school traffic. And that's what I have. I Oh, I did want to mention that this off-site sidewalk, nothing goes without being difficult.
It's we are have been negotiating the language about how that all works. Um, we put in a kind of a placeholder that said that we do a DA regarding the off-site sidewalk. We have been able to work out, I think today, language for an
actual condition. And with your blessing, we'd like to be able to work with staff to put that into the conditions for the board so that we can all avoid a development agreement as it takes a lot of time. It comes to you as a public hearing item. It's the county attorney's office staff, the
county engineer. It's a whole bunch of time. I make a lot of money on it, but but um other than that, the having an actual condition um that sets forth the terms of what we how we do this off-site sidewalk is much preferable. I wish it was in your agenda packet, but it's been a lot of work. Um, but we I think we've
got it figured out this morning. So, I wanted to to update you on that as well and see if you were comfortable if you decide to recommend approval of this if we can change the condition that requires a DA um and replace it with an actual condition of the terms of how we do this off-site sidewalk.
>> Barbara, what I think is more important is to disclose the business terms of that, which is that you are building the off-site sidewalk, but your maximum contribution is $100,000 >> plus mobility fees. Right. And then on for the site related
sidewalk credits for anything above between the five foot and the 8 foot crosssection. >> That's correct. >> Just want to make sure that was disclosed. >> Yes. >> You're not building all that for free. >> No. >> Okay. >> That's true. However, the the client's
commitment to we didn't for the off-site portion, we didn't ask for any mobility fee credits. We actually are making a cash contribution of $100,000 towards that improvement and and paying our mobility fees. Yes, for that difference between five and eight along our frontage that is mobility fee creditable
against your bike ped portion. So, thank you David. >> Okay. Any questions for applicant? >> Yeah. So, that 100,000 that's the maximum and what happens if >> you don't get that Richard?
>> Yeah, the the countyy's paying cash for the difference. This is something important for the county this offsite and so it's >> language that's being negotiated. >> Yeah. >> Deal with that. >> Yeah. It's a cash reimbursement over 100,000. Oh, >> okay. Sorry. I had a question on the um I
wonder if we could pull up an aerial on just that. Um >> by the way, Richard, if the school district wants to kick in any money for that, >> right? >> I'll let you know. >> Okay. >> Or that queuing lane. >> Yeah. Oh, the on-site storm water to the
north. I wanted to see a picture of that because I didn't see it on there. I just pointed out to me and then other on a site while they're pulling that up that Bosley Drive, all that stuff is to the south of the school. >> It is. >> Okay. >> Yeah. There's a gap between the school
and Bosley Drive. Um but there also is a thousand foot peeling lane right there that was just put in. >> Yeah. >> So >> that was >> for the school so that everything functions better. But yes, there is a gap there that the county will or maybe another developer will be able to do that piece. >> Yeah. So, I'm looking on the aerial
here. I'm looking for that. >> Yeah. I was going to say you can probably see it better on the topo that's in the packet. >> Okay. That was as we were queuing through it was sort of at the norththeast corner. >> East corner. >> You can pull up. Yeah. Northeast corner
and then there's a south kind of west corner. All right. kind of like >> show some >> a dip in the topo map. >> And it's also on the concept plan as well, I think. Right. >> Yeah, I think that's I saw that. Yeah, right there at that. >> You see it there? >> Where those tracks? Oh, yeah. Yeah, I
see it. >> Yeah, you can see the concept. >> Okay. >> And then also I wanted to note like the property owner is the same property owner to the north. So when that gets developed to make sure we have that 8 foot sidewalk there, too. >> Yes. the county, you have an you have an
ordinance amendment in front of you today to even strengthen the county's current requirements for these types of facilities. Right now, they the code would require today that they would when that a commercial piece comes in, they have to do a five foot sidewalk, but I know you have a co code change before
you today for your second review um to make that to strengthen those requirements. So, >> good. And that conditional use was approved in 2015, I saw. Is it >> 2005? Oh, so is it still in effect or is the entitlement still >> still in effect? Yep.
>> Still in effect. >> Still there. >> The entitlements are still there. Yes. Okay. >> As a matter of right. >> All right. >> That's it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Oh, one more. >> Thank you. >> Sorry, Barbara. >> There was something mentioned about a northern buffer.
>> Okay. >> And I'm just wondering why we would need that right now. So, we have been asked to do binding plans and put more detail onto into our MPUDS. And so, we're addressing things like our park location and our buffers
and at the zoning level. That's why >> All right. >> That's why that is that way. >> It's going to be built or you know, they put the buffer and then you're going to have to take it down probably going to be a compatible use or it's something commercial. >> No, I mean the buffer is on our side.
So, and then the commercial will have to buffer to the residential. >> Yeah. >> So, >> okay. >> Y >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay, >> Janna, we have anything anybody to speak? >> The first individual I have signed up to
speak is a Julia Barurick. I apologize if I butchered your last name. Uh the next individual that we would have after that is a Linda Farmer. a truly 2645 Nawwood Drive, New Purichi, Florida 34655.
And um many many residents in Shady Hills are really upset about the ongoing development and destruction of their green spaces and they would like a pause in it and um technically waiting until
the uh tree ordinance is in effect to uh continue uh potentially with this development. The sidewalks in Shady Hills need to be contiguous, not just one development at a time. The sidewalks need to be in place first. One of my uh
friends's sons died, a teenager, as the um you well know, died a few days before Christmas one year on Shady Hills Road going to a different school. So, uh, great to hear and grateful to hear that,
you know, the developer wants to build sidewalks to the elementary school. That is wonderful. But we need all of the sidewalks in Shady Hills, all of the infrastructure built. And as always, um, advocating for building vertically and
maintaining more tree spaces and tree uh, canopies and wildlife areas because that's why the residents in Shady Hills live in Shady Hills. Like one resident said, how where is the shade going to be if all of the trees are gone in Shady
Hills. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next. >> The next individual I have signed up is a Miss Linda Farmer. And after that, I have Miss Pastor Jen. >> Good morning or good afternoon. I'm going to try not to get emotional. Um
I'm sorry I'm dressed like this. I was over at my house which is three blocks away from where you're fixing to build this and I'm deciding whether I want to live here or not anymore. I'm a resident of 60 years of Pasco County Shady Hills. First thing I want to I'm going to try to keep >> your name in
>> Linda Farmer 18751 Coat Street. I've been in front of you guys several times about the plastic plant, the uh Dell web, the Carella development. She talks about the the entrance to the school. That's was because of me. That's because I sat out on the side of Shady
Hills Road and videotaped three lanes of traffic and accidents happening. I brought it to the BCC. They got it done. She got it done. This is nothing against any of you guys. I respect all of you for the job you do. I respect the job that Barbara does. But let's get back to
the basics. Pasco and Hernando have had problems with County Line Road for many years. It is a notional road. And I don't care, DOT, whoever wants to tell me that I'm
wrong, please do. I'm gonna tell you, on October 7th, 2025, Hernando County decided 5 to zero to deny a development approval on County Line Road because it is a failed road. Now,
this particular section, there's a median in the middle of the road. There's only one way in and one way out. You can't come out of that development, whether it be a development, commercial, whatever, come out of it and
make a lefthand turn. You're five minutes from an intersection to County Line and Mariner. There's a there's a you could only go you would only be able to come in going west and go out going west and then you'd have to turn around. The other option is an exit onto Shady
Hills Road, which everybody seems to like to go to Shady Hills Road. Let me show you the exit of what we're driving on. This is at the end of Lancer. Well, I have to go out onto Shady Hills Road that's falling apart. I'll hand this to her. You guys can This is what
we're driving on Shady Hills Road. It sits on top of a bunch of sand. It's failing. Great. We're going to get sidewalks. You know, you put the sidewalks down the entire side of the opposite road of where the >> Have a motion to receive and file the decree.
>> Can we stop my time? Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> I post like sign. >> Go ahead. Go ahead. >> I feel if this board passes this based on the fact that the county two counties, Pasco and Hernando cannot get
their crap together over over who's going to widen the road. It took forever to get a light put at cobblestone because so many people died. No one should be approving any more development on County Line until County Line is widened.
Bottom line, you've put the sidewalks down Shady Hills. Thank you for the development people doing that. It's on the wrong side of the road. The other side of the road has all the power lines going down it. So, when they develop Shady Hills Road, do we take down the sidewalks that we just built or do we
move thousands of power lines out of the way? Somebody needs to go out and look because it's it, you know, you started with the plastic plant and then that just opened it up for everything else. And, you know, I'm really I'm really upset that uh
>> Go ahead. Try to finish up. >> Listen, I lost my home and my acorage to the Parkway. Okay? We had a 10acre farm. I accepted it. I moved on. I found me a nice little three acres off of Lancer and Shady Hills, figuring on a dead end
road who would ever come here to build around this area. I felt safe. I don't feel safe anymore. There's homeless people. There's drug addicts there. There's so much you're you're Sheriff Kno came in here and presented to you guys that we need sheriffs and we're way
behind in patrolling of sheriffs. He presented I watched that. It was very damning evidence on how far we're behind on our infrastructure compared to how quickly you guys are building. And I know that they have the right to do what
they want with their land. I am not saying that they don't have the right to do it. But what about us? What about the people that have lived there and put their roots down? The animals are they're just running rampant. I mean, I don't have a lot of statistics for you
today except for the fact that it's a state road and y'all can't make a decision on doing anything with it because you and Hernando can't get together and and come to an agreement of what's going to happen. So, pushing something forward that you and another county can't even come to agreement on,
I just find that that's and you can look it up. Um, they denied it five to know five to that's that's big for a county commission to to deny a developer. We all know that because they know they're going to come back and get sued because y'all don't y'all's hands are tied at this point. Developers can do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do
it. I appreciate your time. I appreciate you letting me go over my time. Excuse >> me. Just let me ask you one question. Where is your home in relation to this aerial here? >> I am on the I am >> south side. >> I'm on the I'm on the the west side of
of Shady Hills Road. Lancer comes right out to where this is going to be exiting onto Shady Hills Road. And it's sand. It's a sand pit, guys. It's a sand pit. They d It's It's a big giant super giant bowl of sand that they ride their
four-wheelers in. I'm going to be on it like stink on watching them get the turtles out of there. And if there's one turtle left, I don't care. I'm going to call. I'm just tired. We have no shade. We have no trees left. We have no land left. Our our animals are getting ate up by the freaking the wildlife that's
running through there. I had to call FWC on six gators on the Dell web development. Six alligators were hit in Shady Hills on Shady Hills Road because they're back there digging in swamps. David Allen, where you at? I'm not sure where you're at. The water, go by Del
Webb. Every reservoir in there is full because it's sitting on our aquifer. There's not one dry. There's no when it rains it's going to flood. And that letter that I got back was that they're going to push it back into the wetlands. That they're going to direct the water back into the wetlands.
That's not acceptable to me. So I sent off a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers. But this is what I'm driving on. Last week I had to p two two different times I got screws and nails and in my tires because of all the construction trucks that now drive up and down the road because it's a major
industrial area. And you know it it was farmland. It's a little ass road that was supposed to be farm and it's not anymore. And I'm sorry that I'm upset. Follow me on my Facebook page. Mr. Moody, you do. You know that I'm out there. You know that I'm bringing information and I'm trying to get people
to come here. Man, they work. They can't take a day off of work to come here. They live paycheck to paycheck. They can't. You guys have let not y'all. I'm not blaming you guys, but Jack Mariano, I'm holding him personally responsible for letting a million dollars of penny
for Pasco be paid to Gary's Plastic to incentivize them to come down here to destroy Shady Hills. And I'm going I'm not letting it go. >> Thank you very much. >> All right, >> the next individual I have signed up is Pastor Jen. And after that, we have Miss
Diane Grady. Pastor Jen, if we could get your name and address, please. >> Yes, sir. Pastor Jen Carow, AD Hills Mission Chapel, 15925 Green Glenn Lane, Spring Hill, Florida. Um, I'm here and I
have a lot, so I'm just going to try and plow through it best I can. August MO meeting, four out of five county commissioners requested the MO, four out of five being Commissioner Mariano, Commissioner Joerger, Commissioner
Oakley, and Commissioner Weightman, all advocated to put Shady Hills Road up at the top of the priority list. And this is as a result of safety issues. Uh, as a matter of fact, unfortunately, and I'm going to
try and get through this, but one of my church members, she was one of us and her name's Bonita. And Bonita was just killed at Little Ranch in Shady Hills Road. before that April 1st, right at the
corner of my church lot, a young man killed, you know. So, I know that the commissioners see that this is a priority and there is a need. And I'm sorry. I do not think the current
Florida state CFO would agree with allowing and giving credits for sidewalks when we're going to tear them up and expand the road hopefully within the next 5 years. And and I would say that it it doesn't matter who the land
attorney or the developer is. It it is of no disrespect but a respect to the people of Pasco County where we are giving credits. Respect to those that have lost their lives because they can't safely travel, those that
have been in car accidents and increased insurance rates. I mean, there's a whole plethora of things that we are facing. Everyone in here is facing it. I looked before I came here. Currently on the MLS, we have 11 months
of vacant housing. 11 months of inventory on the MLS as of October. As of October, 15% of all homes in Pasco County, not those being built, those are not factored in. 15% of all homes in
Pasco vacant. 20% of the apartments that we continue to approve vacant. No affordable housing to my knowledge. I could be wrong, but since I've paid attention and because it's very important to me in the community that
that I serve and then I go back to when I was first here and Mr. Moody said, "We need to look at Shady Hills to make them into something with a city center, something
that the people can come around, something where it is okay for people to walk their kids to school, that it is okay to have all these things done to make them profitable. The idea that we have a design at 41 and 52 on the
southwest corner where we have businesses downstairs and we have units upstairs for sale for rent. Why would we take what could be tax base income for the county taking commercial or the
potential and just putting in 160 town homes? Secondly, it's my understanding and I could be wrong as well, but that that that entitlement of multifamily when I do my research according to what
I find in Pasco County land development comp plan, it's good for 6 months and then you have to come back and you have to if you don't bring anything else forward, if you're not moving, if you don't have a site plan on it, that's why
they're here because it's still commercial property. Why can't we work together to make this a good place to improve the lives of those in Shady Hills, not just put sidewalks? I my
folks appreciate it, but but again, they're getting killed while we're waiting for something profitable for the community. So, I'm just asking and the traffic study, there's a new edition. So, it was the old edition and I did my best to do
the most research that I could to come here and just ask you 30 months to catch up per development from the sheriff. 30 months h so are they like 10 years out now because there's so many
developments. So, I just ask today that you at least continue it. If you choose not to to decline the reszone, I ask that you continue it so that we can work together.
According to the jobs and economic opportunity committee, I've been to all these committees and these are the things that they're talking about. They're not talking about more town homes. There's 450 she got a couple months ago for one of her. And I say,
Miss Willilhyde, I don't mean that disrespectfully, and I'm trying to I know my time is up and I appreciate allowing for additional time, but I really am not here to to to bash or belittle anybody. I'm just looking for a
way that we can do the the the thing that in the beginning of 2023 and that's the picture I painted for folks that if they're going to continue develop, let's advocate for something that will truly truly lift this community up. Thank you
for >> Excuse me, but one thing I think you're you do tend to overlook is the fact that this property in the past was already approved for over 400 units. what we're doing is a significant step forward. We're we're
taking it down to 160 units and I think that's a big improvement over what somebody could have done there. I think it's a big consideration for the land owner there. So, we have to consider everybody's concerns, not just
the people that live there. We we have obligations to everybody in this county. And you can't always look at the downside. You gota there's only certain things we can do and one of the things we're doing is we're encouraging
people not to build as many units on the property as as they now can put there and the difference between 160 and 430 is a big drop and should be you should see it as a big success at this moment.
So, you know, when we deal with properties where they have don't already have units approved there, then that's a different story. But this property was approved for a lot of units and we just got rid of most of them.
So, you need to think about that, too. Jen, just point of correction. The first meeting you were here wasn't when I suggested a town center. And I still urge staff to resolve the conflict
zonings along Shady Hills Road so that they can have some commercial development. They can have some services out there. There's no place for these folks to get groceries. But when you were here at that first meeting, it was when Barbara was presenting Dell Webb
and you had your your followers here and the the folks from Shady Hills here and you were complaining about the curve where there are many crosses, there are many monuments on the side of the road
and on that day I said that needed to get fixed and Miss Wilhight went to her developer and they gave the county the right of way to fix that curve. And it's because you've come here and advocated for Shady Hills that these
things are getting done. And it's because you've come here that this development is being presented in the form that it's being presented. The developer is building a sidewalk down to Shady Hills Elementary. He's not he's not building a five- foot wide sidewalk. He's building an eight foot wide
sidewalk. He's reducing the density. And I told you on that same day, you are being heard. But Rome is not built in a day. You are being heard. And the reason this development is presented the way it is
today is because you are being heard. We do see Ms. Farmer's posts on Facebook. We do recognize the deaths that are happening on Shady Hill Road. Ms. Will height went out of her way to get a 1,000 ft along with Commissioner Mariano
to get a 1,000 ft turn lane built to accommodate the school opening. You are being heard. We are listening to you. And to Mr. Gray's point, there's 400 and something units already approved. We We
don't approve this today. someone can go build 400 apartments and maybe there'll be section 8 apartments. You guys are worried about problems out in Shady Hills? That'd be the last thing you need. So, I actually think this is an improvement. But I urge you to keep coming here. You are being heard. Keep
pushing. Shady Hills has been moved up on the priority list because of your activism. Keep doing it. >> One other point I wanted to add too on something you mentioned. Um, and staff can correct me if I'm if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, existing right
ofway for the two-lane Shady Hills is 66 ft, but it's 124 feet per widening of Shady Hills at some point. Um, and this applicant is actually dedicating an additional 29 ft, which is their half of
that rideway, to this project in order to facilitate the eventual widening of that. So, you mentioned, you know, building a sidewalk that's going to have to be torn up. Well, it doesn't look like that's the case based on the the plans that they have submitted and they have dedicated the additional rightway to be able to widen that road without
having to move the sidewalk that they're going to build. So, that's, you know, again, if I'm incorrect, correct me, but that's the way it looks on this plan that was submitted. So, >> well, I would like Mr. seminar or staff to address that issue which is whether the sidewalk will need to be torn up
when Shady Hills is widened because I I don't think that was staff's intent was to give credits for a sidewalk that would have to be torn up. So I just want that to be clarified on the record. >> Thank you. >> Do you want us to retain it?
>> Sure. Yes. So then we need the rocks. >> Okay. >> I think >> Where did the rocks go? >> She grabbed them. Yeah. >> Whoever has the rocks, if they give them to the clerk, that'd be great. >> Who Who are you? Who do you want to
speak? David, >> whoever can speak to the allegation that the sidewalks are going to be torn up when the road is widened. >> Yes. Uh Joe Simino Engineering 12363 Hampton Park Boulevard 33624.
Good afternoon. Um, we are giving up 29 feet of rightway and the proposed plan that you did see shows us putting that sidewalk all the way at the back of that rightway as far as we can go along our 2,000 ft property frontage south of our property to the school. There is luckily
enough rightway to get it in now as we've coordinated with the county engineer to be safe. Um, I'm not sure what the improvement plans look like south of our property, but there's plenty of room now to put that sidewalk in south of our property to the school. I don't know what modifications will be
needed to it in the future, but again, for our 2,000 ft of frontage, we are backing it up as far as we can to our to the extent of our rightaway dedication. So, it will never have to move from that location. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. So, so is there
anyone from staff that can confirm that that 124 feet of proposed right of way that's inclusive of the widening of Shady Hills Road as well as any additional sidewalks that are >> proposed.
While they are finding the answer to that question, we did have one more individual signed up to speak. >> We know that. So, we're going to make sure they can speak. Go ahead, William, if you would cl for clarification. William, if you'd come up. >> Yeah. One second.
>> I didn't want to cut in line. >> William Vermillion, Planning, Development, Economic Growth. Yes. So, to confirm Mr. Polland's point, it is 124T urban typical section. The county may in that urban typical section when we spoke with the county engineer who's
not here eventually turn that 8 feet into a 12oot multi-use path but of course that would happen moving towards the travel lanes within that 124 ft. >> So within Yes. So within the 124 ft that's enough room to accomplish the widening that the county wants to do as
well as have enough room for this path. >> Correct. That is the exact dimensions of the the rideway typical that fits within the >> bottom line is the sidewalk they're building will not need to be ripped out. >> That is correct. Uh like Mr. Simino said specifically along their project
boundary and then to the extent of our the PDN happening fitting their sidewalk improvements to the south with the rideway constraints. >> Okay. Okay. >> Even if it does the children have a safe place to walk until the road is widened, >> right? If it means we got to spend
whatever money it is to keep the kids safe, then so be it. >> Yep. >> Exactly. >> Okay. M Miss, are you waiting to speak? >> All right. Thank you. >> You give us your name and address, please. >> Uh, yes. My name is Diane Grady. I live
at 18135 Rosey Place. Sorry for my blended accent. Um it's in um off Bosley >> in the Shady Hills area. I have submitted numerous requests since my children were in elementary school. I'm
getting to this point. I did submit a request to have a traffic light at Bosley and the um you know it was surveyed but um later um the traffic light is at the
fire station and I was told that traffic lights will be required at all fire stations. I just have this is um the last um um observation that I submitted. I said Shady Hills is a busy road all day and
night. Um, the entire Shady Hills Road, Hernando County, I'm sorry, her Hernando County residents use Shady Hills Road as a shortcut or bypass to the Sun Coast Parkway. I hear um and the um you know,
it's non-stop from um also Haze Road to Soft Wind. Um that's another that's another issue. Um I just said that um it impacts the um Shady Hills residents to turn um north or right. I have to wait
one time I counted and I had to wait for 100 well minimum 20 cars to pass by. Maximum like 100 I count in sets of tens. And um I do like the idea of the um the
sidewalk on Bosley. However, uh Shady Hills Shady Hills Road needs more lighting. It is very dark at night. And Gold Pass Co recently uh stopped the bus line in that area. It was on the news.
It was on ABC action news. And a lot of people ride their bikes at night, especially late at night, and walk. Um, and also I like to mention how um there will be a new Walmart um
neighborhood Walmart store in the Walgreens shopping plaza. And I have this, this was according to SRS, as S is in Sam, R is in Robert, S is in Sam, Capital Markets website, 20,000 cars use
Shady Hills Road per day. And 28,600 cars use Mariner Boulevard per day. And um there will be um well, there the Wendy's is open. So, um, again, the Walmart neighborhood store will be on
County Line Road. Um, again, behind, um, McDonald's. Um, also, I just have to complain about drivers drive. I I submitted requests to Pasco County Sheriff's Sheriff's Department also that some drivers they
pass in a no passing zone. You know, I'm I'm just concerned about this um this section where we're what we're talking about from County Line Road to um Shad Hills Elementary. I agree that there is
no turning left lane and also there's I forget there's a street. So will there be a traffic light at that street or a caution sign because it's again this it's going to the traffic will be backed up from County Line Road to
uh Little Ranch Road where the um fire department is. And again this is this will impact people who live um behind um Bosley. Um I'm I do apologize if if if I'm um you know as I always say
people may not be familiar with the area but our area is needs as much as attention as Trinity Newport Richie I guess I played the neighborhood games. Um so my concern is
a safety concern as pastor any other um person mentioned that there are too many people who walk you know they're pedestrians. It's just a safety issue and especially people do not um the drivers do not slow down for men working. Men are currently working in
different in on different parts of the street and drivers are not slowing down at all. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> Do you have any questions? >> No. >> I mean, are you familiar with Shady Hills Road? >> Oh, yes, ma'am. >> I mean, have you ever sat at different
parts? Like if you sat at the small um post office or I mean at the Dollar General Yeah, we >> um so it's I have you I I've made so many observations I was told to make the you know to submit them online instead
of calling but >> I use Shady Hills Road regularly. >> I will continue to advocate for the people of Shady Hills. >> I understand some people say, "Oh, I don't go over there." I understand that it doesn't seem like it's happening fast
enough, but it's because you all have come out to these meetings and participated in these discussions that things are happening and they've been made a priority. >> Yes. And I'd like to make one more suggestion for the elderly people. I mean, not elderly people, I'm sorry, for
the elderly. Um, if Jack Mariano could make more of a representation, you know, have a town hall at the park, their voices need to be heard, you know, because there is no bus. I mean, I know Gold Pasco is trying to work a um a
service for them. But if we have more more uh commissioners concerned about the area, that that will make a difference. Okay. Well, thank you. >> Thank you very much for your time. Well, you have a comment on some of those questions. >> I mean, we're in familiar plane
development. First, for some clarification about asking for signalization at some of those roads, we do have budgeted for fiscal year 26, a traffic signal at Bosley Drive, which was mentioned, as well as a traffic signal in fiscal year 26 at Little Ranch
Road. Both roads were mentioned. The county is working on signalization there within this fiscal year. So you have signalization scheduled for Bosley and where? >> Little Ranch Road. >> Little Ranch Road. Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. >> William, I have a question for you. >> So I'm looking at the access management
analysis and it says the county line road and Shady Hills are going to function fine and Shady Hills and Shady Road are going to function fine. Um but my question is it assumes a 3%
background growth rate. Are you comfortable with that rate of growth given the improve the what's going on in this area? >> Well, Steve's here and I I do think it's important to note that it's not a
blanket 3%. It is 3% compounding out to the buildout date which was assumed. So, I know that 3% seems small, but it's actually a third higher than the minimum that the code would allow. So, I can I can let Steve speak to why he derived 3%
instead of the 2% minimum for his historical growth assumptions in the access management, but I I would say that that is in numbers terms that is a good deal higher than the minimum allowed by the code for historical growth at 2% compounding.
Okay, >> that was it. Yay. >> Yes, Mr. Chair. We have no other individuals signed up to speak. >> Thank you. >> Is there anybody online for at all? >> There are no individuals signed up on WebEx. I think a lot of your back and forth and
staff's discussion has addressed most of the public comment. Um I did I did note the the first speaker talking about sidewalks need to be in place first. The condition that we have is prior to the first the prior to the final building inspection for the first residential
unit that sidewalk down to Shady Hills Elementary has to be constructed. So we get that. Um, obviously we can't solve all the problems on Shady Hills Road, and we're doing it incrementally, but this sidewalk will be in place down to the school before the first child is in our in our neighborhood. So, I wanted to
point that out. >> Great. Thank you, Barbara. And I know it's unrelated to this case, but at Dell Web, the developer gave the right of way to fix the curve. It wasn't the developer's obligation to fix the curve. That'll be the county's
obligation. That's correct. Correct. >> Okay. That's correct. And the conditional use isn't good for six months. It's actually good. There is no time period on a conditional use. Um >> what's what is the I don't know if this is a question for you, Barb, or for the
county, but what's the standard for requirement of lighting on a road like that when you put a sidewalk? >> I am not sure. I think we have a condition that requires us to comply with the code, but I am not sure um
how the lighting works. >> Anybody from the county have that answer? >> There's a you see William trying to >> Okay. Well, it was brought up. So, I think if we can get an answer at least
they'll have some idea what what to expect there. Well, there's nothing in our code that requires you to light a street or a sidewalk. We have lighting standards that limit the amount of light spill from a site. In other words, I can't light my parking lot up
so bright that it keeps you awake through your window at night. But we don't have any requirements that I'm aware of that >> the county doesn't have a criteria for >> to light the public right of way. That would be something the county works out with the power company.
I would think there' be some William Let's William pull up the code section and see what it says. >> Yeah, I >> think there'd be some kind of a standard with at the power company. >> I would think. Yeah. >> Can everyone hear me from over here? Get up. Okay.
>> Uh Mr. Moody is correct. 9011, which is what we're referencing here for the the street lighting. It's the uh the internal portions of the impunity that are bound by that section of code. The actual rideway that the county has would be power company and
the county working that out. It would be a is there but is there a criteria for like when that should occur? >> It can't be just at the whim of the county to >> that' be probably a question for the county engineer. probably need to look
in the FDOT green book to see if >> I mean there's there's sections of 54 that are unlighted. >> Correct. >> Near little roads. >> Sure. >> So, >> yeah. I just uh I'm just trying to get them some relative expectation. You
know, it's and it's not the developers responsibility, but it is. I mean, >> I'll just say I can't imagine that if the county is going to make a four-lane urban section through Shady Hills that there will not be some roadway lighting that goes along way along with it.
>> There is a condition of approval 22D that the method of lighting for all non local roads will be submitted at time of the uh the record class submitt for each unit or phase. So, this being a non-local road,
>> it'll be a plan. >> Okay. >> It's just interesting to me. The county doesn't have any standard. I mean, there's a standard for interstate roadways, for example. There's all interchanges are lit. >> There may be a standard. I just don't think we have the person here to answer that question.
>> Yeah. It's >> just saying it's not a land development code requirement. to be a roadway design. >> It's a roadway. >> I probably knew the answer 30 years ago when I was first here. I don't remember it anymore. >> On another side of the fence, >> right?
>> Well, if anybody would, you would, I'm sure. That's sort of why I asked you. I just wanted to. But, uh, >> okay. Well, I think we got the answer. We don't know the exact time, but we know what's
what's required. So hopefully that answered some of the questions of the uh of the people in the audience there that had questions about lighting. Okay. Any other questions? >> I had a question as far as that roadway being built. When is the what's the
timeline for that? The four lane. >> That is a million-dollar question. Multi-million dollar question. I don't think it's in the five-year CIP. The question is where is it in any longer term plans? >> I think they didn't they just move it up
recently. >> I don't know that it's actually been moved up. I think there was a desire to move it up. I don't know that it actually has. >> The the board directed that the project be moved up as a priority. That was about maybe a month and a half ago, right? So, I don't know what the status
is. Maybe Mr. Constance knows about that because he handles our county capital improvement program. >> Okay. >> I'm just looking at the study that was done. It it says there's no improvements in the 5-year CIP. >> Dr. Panosces, assistant county engineer
working for the transportation engineer department. Um um Mr. Angel correctly said that we got a direction from the board to move up the priority for Shady Hills Road for the widening, excuse me. Uh however, we are waiting for the new
budget to take into effect to amend the budget to introduce the route study. Uh there is a process to follow to do the widening of uh Shady Hills Road. First we have to do the route study to assess where the widening is going to happen on
the east side or on the west side or centered. >> Um so we will have to look at different alternatives. That route study I estimate based on past experience for similar projects will take about two years to complete. Then we have to go
into the uh design phase which is also about two years. And then we have to go into the right ofway acquisition because obviously we will need the right of way to uh accommodate the four lanes of shady hills and then of course we have to go to construction. So it's going to
be a lengthy process. It's not just going to happen tomorrow. The widening is going to take some time. >> But I think the question is when do you plan to put the route study in the five years because that starts the process. >> Yes. Uh that's the goal. You know, that's why I said we will try to amend
the budget for fiscal year 26 to include the route study. >> So hopefully in the next fiscal year getting the the process started. >> We'll start. Yeah. The route study. >> Okay. Well, could you hurry it up a little bit? >> Thank you.
>> We'll try. >> The good thing is we're in next year. It's fiscal 26 as of October 1. >> There you go. >> There we go. Well, and he's saying very politely what I'm going to say a little more. Part of the problem is that we have to go through a lot of steps
because to acquire the rightway. >> Yeah. >> And I appreciate the Barbara's client is is all of her clients have dedicated the rightway, but unfortunately there's a lot of property owners that have not. And so >> the process we have to go through to condemn all that right away is not a
fast process. There's a lot of residential along. >> If everybody donated us the rightway, we could probably build this road twice as fast as what he just mentioned. >> Well, Pastor Jen, if you're listening, just you need to get out there and get that right away for it.
>> Rally rally the property owners and have them dedicate 20 29 ft. >> But >> each side >> each side. But I mean, but we sort of have to figure out where we have to do some preliminary route study and design to figure out who needs to give us the rightway first. I mean, that's >> that's correct.
>> Before anybody can knock on doors, we have to design it, >> right? >> So, yeah, it might be 60 >> Yeah. >> six feet on one side and no feet on another side. >> Thank you very much. I think >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay.
Anything else? I think everybody's had a chance to speak. So, any motions, please? Any motions? I'd move to approve item PC2.
This is a net benefit to the community. I understand the passions of the people in Shady Hills, but at the end of the day, the choice we have today is 400 some odd apartments or
160 platted town homes. I'll take 160 platted town homes over 400 apartments any day. >> Yeah, I agree. >> Okay. Do we have a second? >> I'll second that. >> Any further discussion of the motion? I
just wanted to state on record that um I'm not generally in favor of converting commercial to residential in accordance with policy flu 187. That said, obviously like Mr. Moody said, this was approved over 10 years ago for almost
triple the density what the applicants providing or or proposing. Um and um I think this is the right move considering what's already in place and what's already approved. So just wanted to state that for the record. Okay, we have a motion and a
second. Any other discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying I. >> I posted like sign. Okay, motion carries. I will also point out just for the record that we no longer allow
multifamilies a conditional use in C2. >> We remove that provision from our code or we do but it's only if it's vertical mixed use or >> affordable or in the West market area. So this kind of stuff >> this kind of thing doesn't can't happen under our code anymore. >> Correct.
Okay, >> go ahead. >> Good afternoon, planning commission members. Kurt Cyerson of planning development and econom. >> We have to have some silence back there if you don't mind prime and present. >> Thank you, sir.
>> Go ahead. >> Good afternoon, planning commission members. I'm Curt Cyverson of Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Presenting the Rowan Industrial MPD agenda item PTE 267882 located in West Pasco County. The site's location is illustrated by the red star.
We're in Commissioner Jagger's district. petition today is a resoning request from a P2 professional office district to an MPU master plan unit development for the maximum development of a 20,000 square foot building following the I1 light industrial uses of LDC section
528. In red we see the MPD boundary located immediately east of Rowan Road approximately 400 ft north of the Rowan Road and Pla Road intersection. This site is abuing immediately south of Alderman Lane. a private residential roadway. The development does not
propose a connection or utilization of alderman. The site maintains a PO2 professional office zoning classification. The boundary illustrated in pink. The current future land use is res 6 residential six dwelling units per gross
acre illustrated in pink. A change to the future land use by smallcale comprehensive plan amendment CPAs 24 parenthesis 11 petitions to amend the site's future land use classification from res 6 to IL industrial light
supporting the MPD user. The comprehensive plan amendment has been given an recommendation of approval by the planning commission and it heads to the board of county commissioners for adoption slated for the 129 public hearing. The Rowan Industrial MPD has been conditioned that the MPD requires
adoption of such comprehensive plan amendment by condition of approval number 35. Reading, this MPD shall not be effective until the corresponding industrial light IL future land use classification change is effective. Here's our context map. The surrounding
built environment of perspective Rowan industrial MPD is characterized by both residential communities and a non-residential development pattern. The residential users are primarily single family detached homes and multif family residential complexes. The non-residential pattern here is mostly
comprised of commercial users. Abudding immediately south is a business user. At the intersection of Ron and Path is a gas station. East of the site, we observe the Cody River Elementary School. Quarter mile south is a Marine Corps facility and a quarter mile north
are multiple commercial users. Here's our MPD master plan. The master plan illustrates a site as one parcel boundary in red which is inclusive of the total 1.8 acres requested as a maximum entitlement of 20,000 square ft
and the sought uses are the I1 light industrial uses LDC section 528 access of the subject development as illustrated by the arrows on Rowan road. A variation has been requested by the applicant
from LDC section 805, specifically 805.6 restrictions on post-development wetlands and upland buffers within residential lots and non-residential parcels. The request is to ensure parcel owner maintains and is responsible for the open space, drainage areas, common
areas, landscape areas, wetland areas, buffer areas, preservation, conservation areas, and other special purpose areas without pladding or conveyance to a CDD. PTE is amanable to this request as it accomplishes the intent of BO 5.6 being that maintenance of this area takes
place even without a CDD. In conclusion, PTE recommends approval of resoning petition item PTE 267882. Thank you for your time and consideration. I'm here if you have any questions. >> You want to address this condition that was handed out?
>> Yes, sir. The applicant has voluntarily agreed to remove uses of the I1 zoning district by approval of this MPD. I intended
for the applicant to explain this, but the applicant has agreed voluntarily to forego the following uses of the I1 Sony district. Boat manufacturing, laundry or clothes cleaning or dying establishments, crematory recycling
operations, shooting ranges, medical waste disposal facilities, auction houses, construction and demol demolition debris disposal facilities, yard trash disposal facilities, and wholesale storage of chemicals, gasoline
or liqufied petroleum gas. Okay, >> any questions? applicant present. Is anyone here to object? Okay. Good afternoon again. Barbara
Willilhight, 6327 Grand Boulevard. Um the change to condition 25 came as a result of our neighbor Mr. Kohler, Mr. Dan Kohler contacted the county. The county contacted me. Mr. Gerardy actually talked to um Mr. Coler who's one of our neighbors and he actually
they discussed these particular uses that are in the code as as being concerns. So we took every one of those uses that were discussed between Mr. Gerardi and Mr. Kohler and put him into this condition. Um so that's how this came to be. Um and I did hand out to Mr.
Kohler to him this this list and he's going to speak. Um I know he has a few things he wants to ask still. Um, but I think this is agreeable to him, but let's let him speak if if we could and then uh we'll do any followup uh after that. >> Just for clarity, can you explain why
this came in as an MPD instead of a just uklidian I1 district? >> Sure. So, the I1 district has um 150 foot setback which kills a lot of industrial killing um open yard requirement.
the staff has had it on their list and I to update that requirement, but we had to bring it forward as an MPUD. We actually our comp plan came to you a long time ago, the comp plan to industrial and it's been sitting while we had to come for an MPU. I know staff is working on amending that section of
the code because by definition light industrial doesn't have adverse impacts. That's what's the difference between by code light industrial and heavy industrial. Light industrial doesn't have adverse impacts where it wouldn't be allowed. It would have to be a heavy industrial. So you
have this difference between saying that light industrial can't have adver adverse impacts but then requiring very very large open yard setbacks which don't in my opinion have much of a purpose. So we had what we did in this case is we built here's where this
property is, here's how big it is. Here's what's around it. and we built the setbacks and the buffering to the property and to this particular project and that took a while to bring forward and was quite expensive for the client. Um hopefully you'll get where you'll be
updating your code with staff so that we don't have these issues with industrial and we have a a more um appropriate setback for light industrial but that's the reason why you see this as an MPD. All right.
>> And I'll have a variance. I did a variance not too long ago regarding this issue. Um, and I have another one coming up. So, um, I'm hopeful to work with staff to bring forward a fix to the code so we don't have to do some of these things that are take time and cost
property owners quite a bit of money. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any questions? >> I have a question for David. I was looking at condition five. Can you look at that? And I'm not sure why we're involved in it and the county's involved in it.
>> Condition five. >> Hold on. So I think that's just saying that whatever association they create First of all, they're having an they have an exception at the very end of this that says they're not going to do
this for um if it's all under one ownership, which which they're probably going to do. >> Okay. >> But the reference to the school board just says that any common association or CD not includes schoolboard property.
>> All right. This is a >> standard language. Okay. Just want to make sure >> put in all >> zoning conditions to make sure that you're not subject to any CDD or HOA assessments. >> Okay. >> Just for your benefit. >> Yeah, that's what I thought. >> Unless you want to start paying those.
>> No. >> Well, you're going to start paving a road and >> he's trying to get I know. Try to get me for everything. >> We're happy to take any money that you can give us for >> Stop asking questions. >> He'll be rich. >> Chris doesn't ask those questions. >> Okay. Okay, I think we have one person
that wanted to speak. If you want to come forward, please state your name and address. Good afternoon. My name is Dan Kohler, 7319 Alderman Lane. If it's possible, if they can bring up the Google map picture of the pro said property, this will give you guys a little bit insight.
>> Sure. >> Okay. Can you zoom in a little bit? Okay. So, if you see where the yellow dot is, you're going to see that house right there. That's my house. 5 years ago, 6 years ago, I don't know the exact date, deep construction was involved. They went ahead and got preliminary plans involved with a said retention pond. That is my biggest concern, which
I know it has nothing to do with you guys at this point. It's in reference to the resoning. I did talk with them. They worked with me. Extremely happy they met my requirements. I'm extremely happy. My biggest thing goes out to Mr. Moody. I understand he's in storm water. I'm only concerned is when I built my property
that wasn't there yet. They had a preliminary plan and set to put their retention pond at Alderman and Rowan. Problem with that is my leechfield is 75 ft from that said location. So I understand that's not your problem. I'm
just concerned about the setbacks that they're asking for. If I understand correctly, I had wetlands on my property. I was not allowed no setbacks. I just want to make sure it meets the building codes. the and then I want to make sure the land development code is going to be enforced and not give an
extra room to commercialize this because this is an investment guys. This isn't their home that wiped out my savings to build my home for me and my wife and my grandchildren. If they go with that said property and they're not held to setbacks for wetlands, for drainage, what does that do to me? Does it take
out my leechfield? I have nowhere to put my leechfield. my lease field could not go in the backyard per the health department for the reason of setbacks due to wetlands. So, I just don't oppose it as long as they're not given more room than what I wasn't allowed to have when I built and when I asked for room
because mine was a nightmare to get my house built on said land. And I had to jump through a ton of hoops. So, I don't want them to be given extra room to maximize their profit and maximize their portfolio at a working man's loss. I don't have 20 grand to relocate. That's
my only concern. But otherwise, I don't appeal it. I'm for the growth. I'm for development in our community. That's how we make money and that's how our economy grows. But we also can't maximize that lot if it's going to affect my lot because we also have another big development that's coming directly
behind it that just got funded and that's going to be the commons at Spirits Village. So, we also got to take that into effect. So, I'm not opposed it. I just don't like the wetland setback to maximize what their building lot is. So, >> which property is yours again?
>> I'm the corner lot. >> Right there with the arrows right there. >> 19 there. Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> So, I'm going to be careful here because I think the preliminary plan that you're talking to before I was built >> my colleague down here. >> So, I'm going to speak in generalities,
two things. 626, which is the section of the Florida Administrative Code that controls septic systems, doesn't allow a retention pond within 15 feet, the high water mark of the retention pond and that septic system.
>> Yes. And we're benchmarked, I think, at like 20 something inches already. So, that's my that was my only concern. >> Also very common, and you'll have to ask Mr. Gerardi because I think he was the engineer for that system. But it's not uncommon
when you go to the water management district and get a permit for a retention pond if there are nearby septic systems that they ask you to provide a groundwater mounding analysis that demonstrates that the groundwater mound created by the retention pond does
not intercept or inter interfere with the operation of the septic system. That's also common with wells too. Yeah, because my well is also I think 150. >> Other than that, I can't speak to the specifics, but I think Jamie did design that. So, >> yeah. So, that's like I said, I'm pro it. I'm not against it. Like I said, my
only thing I am going to object to is the variance of them. So, they're maxing out the lot because I was held back because I'm wetlands my back half my yard, my neighbor's wetlands, half backyard. He had 37 feet of water in his backyard. I had 23 feet of my water in my backyard in the last storm we had last year.
So, I think we need to make sure it's going to fit that property before we okay and say, "Hey, they can maximize the lot." And then what does it do to the water coming down old lane and where's that water get directed to? >> One, we're in the zoning portion here. We're not looking at the sight specific
design. We're looking at whether the zoning is appropriate and compatible with the area and this isn't the right place to put this type of zoning. But I can assure you that they have a lot of hoops to jump through
to get approvals to build. We have a 1500 plus page land development code. And then they have all of chapter 62330 of the Florida Administrative Code dealing with storm water to deal with. They've got transportation issues
they're going to have to deal with. Utility issues they're going to have to deal with. They're not going to get a license to pave the site from one end to the other and start building that tomorrow. There's going to be a lot of eyes that look at this before this is all approved,
>> which I understand. And going back to what you said, I understand it's not a site approval, but the approval they're asking for is also a zone ver variance if I understand correctly. >> Well, they're asking for some variations from the code. One of those being that
they don't have to put any wetlands on the site under the control of a homeowners association or CDD because this is intended to be a oneowner site. So there won't be a homeowners association or a CDD. They're not proposing
>> I haven't heard any proposal in here to fill any wetlands or anything like that. So >> So even though to clarify because >> you don't have to >> I'm a glass guy. I'm not building even reszone is not going to change. They'll
still be held to said land development codes. Correct. >> Okay. Can I I just want to clarify one thing. Okay. So, part of this process, the one arguable deviation they're doing is in terms of setbacks is the 150 foot setback, but I believe that's only to
the east. Is that right, staff? >> I don't think they're changing. Somebody tell me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they're changing any. Is it going back or >> required setbacks to the north? Because his property is to the north, correct? >> Yes, sir.
>> Are is are the setbacks they're requesting for the north side of their property any different than what the code would normally require? >> No, sir. The variation would be to their eastern MF2 neighbor which ordinarily applied by 528 would require 150 ft of
open space for industrial >> back required to this gentleman's property. >> Gentlemen >> because like like that's my biggest concern is my leechfield. Otherwise they've been great to deal with. I just don't want to have an issue gets built six months down the road after they build. I'm just
>> I hear you. I do. I hear you. But I'm going to tell you this. I have 100% confidence in that gentleman over there who's the engineer for the site >> and that's why you guys are on the board >> many years. And he's not somebody who's who takes his job and his
responsibilities lightly. >> Um he's not somebody that I've known has ever flooded anybody or >> Well, but I'm not even sure that you're voting on something that's what he's thinks >> maybe >> is happening. >> Yeah. He's saying that he doesn't want
us to grant some deviations from the code. >> I'm not sure that you're granting any deviation from the code that would affect him because I think the only deviation that you're arguably granting is >> the setback to the east. >> Yeah. The two object the only the only
two things I had to conditional that there's actually three total was the one which we talked we agreed to that. So that's the addendum. That was our discussion yesterday, which is amazing. And then my other two was the variance. Just get clarification on the variance to make sure that they can't max out
that lot. And then it ends up 65 ft from my Leechfield. And then I just wanted to make sure they're still going to be held to the >> To be clear, they are requesting a deviation from what would normally be the setback, but it's to the east side of the property >> and I'm not sure how that affects you, though. >> We weren't given that information. I
didn't see that. That's why I'm asking clarification on it. So, I don't think they're requesting any deviation on the north side, but we'll get >> Can I ask you for a clarification? >> Yeah. >> And maybe it's better asked for staff. >> The zoning map shows that the property to the east is MF2, which is a
residential zoning. >> Yes. >> Okay. And the property to the north that this gentleman lives on, according to the map that's in our agenda memo, is agricultural residential.
It's my understanding that the 150 foot clearard setback applies to those areas adjacent to residential. So is staff considering that agricultural and or is it being considered residential? I
believe they consider it agricultural because they only identified. But I'll let staff answer because they only alerted to me that there was an issue to the east. But this is not this is a staff question because the write up only says that >> okay
>> that the 150 foot yard would normally only be required to the east. I mean >> William familiar planning development economic growth the the code defines agricultural district to include AR
agricultural residential. So it it's considered by the code to be an agricultural district >> 150 yard 150 foot free clear yard set back to the agricultural zoning. >> Correct. And so what Kurt and Miss Will height did was a type B buffer
consistent with the 9052 matrix. the buffering in between industrial and residential. >> Okay. And that buffer is 15 feet. >> 15 feet and then a 25 foot setback. >> Okay. Is that from the property line? >> Yes, sir. >> So, it' be a total of 40.
>> Okay. >> Excuse me, but uh Jamie, you're the engineer for the project. Can you come up and clarify? >> Yeah. Can you just confirm? >> Yeah. Okay. Uh Jamie Gerardi, Regency Design and Engineering, 9400
River Crossing Boulevard, Sweet 102, Newport Richie. Um just to clarify a couple things just for the record. The Yes, we did do the design. The original design was done in 2010 and clearly the conditions out there today are much different than they were then. That
prior approval is no longer good. We're going to have to go back in and repermit the project through the county's land development code and with swift mud and the water management district and the state rules that John mentioned earlier. So, this site is going to be looked at again. There's a lot of things out there that are different that we're going to
have to take into account and trust me, the agencies will give me plenty hard time. >> Okay. But you're you're agreeing that the setback requirement is not affecting the northern boundary. Well, I mean, again, the setback, I
mean, they they said the setback was from the property line, and we're going to be far enough away from his leechfield that the building set back is not going to affect his leechfield. >> That's the only thing he seems to be concerned about. So, >> well, storm water storage. >> I I just wanted to make sure that you
know that one. Yeah. So, we got the clarification of that. I'm good there. Then as long as which they did, they agreed to the addendum which we did today for the conditions. I don't oppose because he explained to me and Mr. Moody said they're still going to be held to the land development code. Then I don't oppose it. No, >> I still don't think staff answered my
question. The setback on the north side, is it the same setback that they would have had to comply with if this had just been a normal uklidian district? I I can't tell. So, I'm asking >> I think he said yes because they're
treating it as an agricultural property. >> I I'm I've accepted staff's answer that it doesn't require 150 foot, >> but I'm but I'm asking whatever setback is you are imposing. What is it consistent with what we would normally
require in the code? This would be I1 David. >> Yes. >> Chris Harrison. >> Yes, it is consistent. The 25 ft is consistent with the 528 front setback in addition to a type B buffer which is also consistent of 905.
>> Okay. So to answer the gentleman's question, you're you're the applicant is not requesting any deviation from what would be the normally required setback on the north side. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And just to point something out too, the
reason that it's 25 ft on the north side is this is a corner lot which has two front yards and two sideyards. Had Alderman Lane not been there, then it would have been a sideyard setback of only 15 feet. But because that street's there, it's 25. Plus, he still has the
width of the street, which functions as a setback because Alderman Lane is unimproved and impassable. >> Right. >> Okay. I think we're there. All right. Was there anybody else that needed to speak? If not, I hear a
motion. Move approval. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. Further discussion. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> Those like sign. >> Motion carries. Thank you. >> With the note that Mr. Gerardy is abstained. Of course. >> Well, and can the motion make clarify
that's with the revised condition? >> Oh yes. >> Yeah. >> So I'll mend that motion to include the revised condition 25. >> Still second. Still vote. I I in >> favor. Hi. >> Hi. >> Okay.
Now, now we got more PC6. Yeah. >> Uh, Mr. Chair, prior to beginning PC6 and PC7, would you like to take a break? >> Yes, I would. Just think. You're a mind readader. Good.
>> Thank you. >> Break. Five minutes. Maybe six. >> Maybe seven. >> All right. Call me to order. Um the next item that we have uh GA German planning development and economic growth. The next item that we have on the agenda is item PC6 and you will be
sitting as the local planning agency for this item. It's PTE 260022 an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code section 1302.2 Two, mobility fees to
clarify the 2025 mobility fee schedules do not expire on December 31st, 2025 and amend other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for severability and inclusion to the land development code and an effective date
presented by staff. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon gentlemen. Vasilio Sopolis, Planning, Development, Economic Growth. I'm here to present the land development code amendment for section 1302.2 mobility fees. Just to give some intent behind this
update, this update is to revise section 1302.2 to reflect the appropriate applicability of the 2025 mobility fees that are currently set to expire at the end of this year. Our goal is to ensure that those mobility fees remain in effect until the board formally adopts new mobility fees in 2026.
We're not currently proposing any adoption of new fees at this time. For some additional context, in 2021, the board adopted mobility fees for the years 2022 through 2025. At that time, there was intent to adopt new fees this year before the expiration. Uh however,
there's been a delay in completing the study due to coordination with the Pasco 2050 comprehensive plan update and a desire to obtain feedback from stakeholders regarding the rate increases. The project lead for the mobility fee study estimates a proposed amendment for mobility fee rates to be brought to the
LPA sometime early in 2026. With that in mind, I'd like to walk you through the proposed revisions. Starting with section 1302.2D, 2D. We're updating the language to reflect that the county will commence re-evaluation and update of the mobility fee study no later than 123125.
Previous language stated that the county would conduct such studies by that date. Additional revisions include the removal of applicable dates 2022 through 2025 from the start of the posted fee schedules. And then finally, the removal of the end date of 123125
from all 2025 mobility tables ensures that those fees will remain in place until the new fees are adopted. Staff recommends the local planning agency find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan. I'm available for any questions. Thanks.
>> All right. Any questions? Not >> we have any comments from any audience? See any? I have a motion. >> Motion to approve. >> Second and >> a second. Further discussion. All in favor signify by saying I.
>> I post like sign. >> Excellent. Thank you. >> Okay. [Laughter] >> Get used to it. >> Record. >> For item PC7, you will also be sitting as the local planning agency for this
item. It's PTE 260002. An ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code section 522.9 connected city master plan unit development district section 901
infrastructure standards. Section 901.1 transportation corridor spacing section 901.6 street design and dedication requirements. Section 901.7 bicycle facilities. Section 901.8 eight pedestrian facilities, appendix A definitions, and other sections as necessary for internal consistency,
providing for applicability, repealer, providing for sever severability, excuse me, inclusion into the Pasco County Land Development Code, and an effective date presented by staff. >> Thank you. >> Okay, can you guys hear me? Okay. >> Yeah.
>> Fantastic. Rebecca Bow, Planning, Development, Economic Growth, here uh again to present PTE 26002, Infrastructure Standards, Land Development Code Amendment. Okay, so really quickly, um the intent of this ordinance update is to update
certain portions of the code for internal consistency, consolidating sections 901.7 and 901.8 8 into a comprehensive section 901.7 providing enhanced standards for location and connectivity for our bicycle and ped network. And we hope
that these changes will strengthen the county's position to require land development projects uh to construct segments of our non-motorized transportation network. So, as a recap from our last uh discussion on this item, there was concerns about requiring a multi-use
pave trail exclusively on the south or east side. The general thought was that this policy was too rigid and raised several concerns including potential impact on property values, challenges on diagonal roads, conflicts with existing alignments, and uh there would remain a
need for pedestrians to cross the street to get from a sidewalk to a trail. So to resolve these issues, we are proposing a 10-foot multi-use pave trail on both sides of arterial and collector roads.
This approach will simplify administration, create a symmetrical network, and support future updates to the county's typical sections. So, some of the other uh conversations we had was that what we were proposing didn't exempt rural future land use
categories and that section 901.7 and 901.8 as they exist today currently do um exempt anything below res 3. So to uh address those concerns, we've written in language to exempt agricultural agricultural rural rural
residential one future land use from the requirements of this section except where the zoning is an MPU and in that case uh the county would retain the right to negotiate these facilities. All right. Lastly, we discussed the
payment and loot option. There was some sentiment that that option should model the panel's county's system which allows developers to build where the sidewalk is needed rather than putting it on the site or adjacent to the site. So what we are proposing with our
payment and loo option um functions similarly in situations where it's not feasible to construct a sidewalk or a multi-use path or where there's already a path programmed in the CIP. um the developer can pay the county and then we
can construct that path um somewhere else that provides a benefit to the fee payer. I did review Penllis County's land development code to look for this particular process. I found one section in their code that spoke to this. It was
applicable to subdivisions. Um and it explicitly stated that they can provide a sidewalk in other locations to overcome physical constraints where there is a benefit to the development. I didn't find in their land development code anywhere else
where they have a payment L option or an option to build it the sidewalk somewhere else. Um I even called Panelis County and they confirmed that there was nothing else written in their land development code that touched on this process. All right. So, overall summary of our
changes. We're making some updates for internal consistency. So, 522.9 and 901.6. We're updating cross references. So, everywhere the code says 901.7 and 901.8, we're updating that to the 901.7.
Section 901.1 transportation corridor spacing. Um, we are updating that to reference the current resolution. That's 19-136. And indicating that we will be placing the county typical sections in our development review manual, which we hope
will make them easier to find. Uh we're also adding some clarifying language to that section, um which states that bicycle and pedestrian requirements, as stated in 901.7, um are applicable to arterial and collector road designs.
Um oh, and we're updating 901.6 six street design and dedication requirements. This is a minor update to allow friction course as an allowable road construction material and a broad summary of our changes to the bike ped uh lane development code.
Currently 9017 918 are applicable to res 3 future land use or higher. Um on subdivision collector roads they have to provide either a bike lane or a 12-oot multi-use path. Pedestrian facilities are required on all street types except for alleys. Um on collector and
arterial, five foot sidewalks are required and 4 foot sidewalks on all other streets. What we're proposing is a land development code that would be applicable to all development sites except for agricultural agricultural
rule res residential one future land use and it varies by street type. So again, we're proposing 10 foot multi-use paved trails on both sides of arterial and collector roads, five foot sidewalks on one side and eight foot side or multi-use pave trails on the other side
of a subdivision collector and 5 foot sidewalks on residential roads. In addition, we're proposing pedestrian circulation and connectivity language. So this language would require all on-site uses to be linked via sidewalks.
They have to connect to the external pedestrian or bicycle network. They have all principal structures have to be connected to each other and parking lots with 100 or more spaces have to provide a safe direct path from the parking lot to the building entrances. A little
later in our uh process in writing this code, we got some feedback that this particular section for the parking lots should uh require frequency requirements that specify how often sidewalks should be provided within the parking area. We're currently working on adding that
into our draft and we plan on adding it to the draft that we will bring to the board of county commissioners. Oh, and then our payment in L. So, as I mentioned previously, we're requiring or providing a payment in le of construction option. So again, where
it's not feasible to build a sidewalk or multi-use path, applicants can pay in lie. Um and and um we can use that money to build the sidewalk as long as it benefits the fee pair.
This is our overall vision for the multimodal network we'd like to achieve. And the recommendation is that find the proposed amendments consistent with the comprehensive plan. and I'm here to answer your questions. >> Is there a proposed
fee for payment in loo? >> I think the plan right now is to have the developer provide a cost estimate. That cost estimate would then be reviewed by the county attorney who would give it its stamp of approval. >> That's the county attorney. >> Oh, I'm so sorry. County engineer.
County engineer. >> Got that one quick. >> The county engineer would review it. Yeah. uh he would give the stamp of approval and then that would be the cost that we would use. And we like that method because it can accommodate uh different widths and construction
materials that might have otherwise been required by the code. >> Can I ask who did you speak with at Penelis County? I I don't recall her name, >> but if there's a process that they're
using in Penllis County, that's >> I would tell you to reach out to Jean Crossson, >> okay? >> Who's the development review manager, >> okay? >> BRD down there. And it is their common policy that if you cannot build the
sidewalk adjacent to your site that you will go build the same length of sidewalk elsewhere where they need it and that what I'm saying is that in their land development code. I didn't find any supporting language for that. >> Just saying that's their policy and that's what they do. I've had it happen
on multiple projects. >> Understood. The reason that I suggested that here, don't get me wrong, I'm not against a payment in Lou. In fact, I've been behind the scenes lobbying for a payment in Lou for many years because my clients
have built a lot of sidewalks to nowhere. The difference is this. My client can build a sidewalk probably half the price you can build one. And they can do it twice as fast.
And we want sidewalks. We want production. I don't mean this to sound insulting because I do understand there's a process, David, for demonstrating that you're taking only the right of way you need for a road.
But the citizens in Shady Hills are screaming, "We need a road. We need a road." We're telling them, "Yeah, hold on for six or seven years. You'll get a road. If you let the developer go build a sidewalk before you give him his CEO, they'll have the sidewalk today.
>> Mhm. >> Not seven years from now. Not when you get around to it. Not when it's on somebody's CIP. >> Not when there's seven years of inflation on the money that was paid in. >> Exactly. >> You'll get more sidewalks quicker.
I'm not opposed to payment in lie at all. I just hope that you would keep such a such an option open as a way to satisfy building a sidewalk regulation so that we can actually have sidewalks to somewhere and have them today, not 10
years from now. But that's all. Otherwise, I'm happy with this. >> Can you flip back to the previous slide real quick? I just wanted to look at that little diagram again. Okay. So that's the big difference is we we talked about the east and the south I
think. So now this is just splitting the difference and we're going on both sides everywhere. >> Yep. >> Okay. Any other questions or comments? >> Go back to your table. I think it's one or two more slides. >> This one. >> Yes.
So where's the 12oot multi-use path go? >> That's the piece that we're changing. So, we were proposing a 12-oot multi-use path on one side, the south of the east side, and we've changed it to propose a 10-ft path on both sides. >> Column is what it was.
>> Correct. >> And the right column is Okay. Right. >> Okay. >> So, go back to the diagram again. >> Yes. >> So, on your subdivision collectors, it it actually isn't symmetrical, right? So, it's five foot on one, eight on the
other. Yes. >> And that's on is that the same situation? It's on the west and north sides where it's five feet and >> No. In that particular section, we wrote language to say put it on one side, but if there's an existing alignment, you
have to um build per that alignment. >> Quick question about the graphic for the vision roads. It says you want a 10-ft multi-use path on each side. And then it says 5 foot marked bicycle lane on roads 40 miles an hour or less. Does that mean
you're going to have a multi-use path and a bike lane? Or if it's a 40 m an hour or less road, it'll just be the bike lane. >> It means we'd have both, but if it's a 40 mile per hour or less road, it would be marked as a bike lane. >> Okay. I'll just say I'm
not supportive of bike lanes. I'm pretty sure one of the commissioners will give you give you some push back about bike lanes. I call them suicide lanes. >> Yeah. >> As soon as these things were invented and people could start texting and
driving. Riding your bicycle in a bike lane is a death wish. Well, I've been advocating that we stop calling them bike lanes and nobody ever listens to me because >> because to to me they basically function
as the road shoulder and I don't know why we keep calling them bike lanes because they're effectively >> the breakdown lane. I mean when your car >> you need a place when your car is broken down you don't want people stopping in the middle of the travel lane. >> Disagree with you. >> So you need a place for people to pull
to the side. And if that is maybe we just need to stop calling them bike lanes and calling them the roadway shoulder. But but that's the problem when you say eliminate the bike lane is you're eliminating the roadway shoulder too. That's the problem. >> The only thing that makes it a bike lane
is that little diamond stripe. >> Maybe we should start calling it shoulder/bikelane. But but but I want a place to break down when my if my car is broken down. I don't want to be stuck in the middle of the travel lane. So, let's not forget about the
people driving the cars, too. >> They need a place >> not opposed to a paved shoulder. >> That's That's effectively what that is. >> You have a 10-ft multi-use path. That seems to me you could drive a bike on that. >> Yeah, pretty much. That's why multi-use. But I'm saying is is that
>> even if it is usable as a bike lane, it's also usable as the and that's what the code makes it clear is that that it also function as the shoulder. You we're not going to require you to do a bike lane and a shoulder. They're the same thing. >> Yeah. The irony of this is is you lose that on
a road 40 miles an hour or above where you arguably need more width on you. you know, the faster you're moving, you need you need more width of travel, >> right? I don't think the intent is presented here is this is supposed to be a lane for bicycles. I'm just saying I'm
not supportive of these lanes for bicycles adjacent to whether it be 30 mph traffic or 50 mph traffic or 70 mph traffic. It's foolish. Half the time I see people riding down the wrong way down these bike lanes.
>> Yeah. >> I've seen people in wheelchairs riding in the bike lanes. I get them off of That's why we're building these multi-use paths. We need shoulders. I'm all about shoulders. That's fine. >> Get the bicycles off of adjacent to the
>> get away from the track in very dense urban areas, you know, where it's 15 miles an hour or less or something like that. But >> get help by a car 15 miles an hour, it still hurts. >> Well, my my only point is is that if you have the width there, >> if you decide to take out the striping for bikes, it's still there as a
shoulder. My my concern is that if you don't at least require that width to be there, you have no shoulder. >> That that's my concern. >> Derek's point, >> if the road was if the road is going to be designed for 45 m hours, then you wouldn't have a shoulder,
>> right? You actually lose width of the road, which is counterintuitive for a faster speed limit. >> Oh, I probably need a shoulder there, too. I don't disagree with >> one thing we need to just everybody needs to keep in mind is the rightway width doesn't change. So you start
adding extra 5T for a sidewalk, extra 5 foot for multi-use trail, extra room for a shoulder, you're taking away green space, you're taking away landscape trees that >> Yeah. >> the other side of the argument we >> And that's the other place too where you have to run those utilities and so the next time you've got to dig up the broken water man, guess what you're
fixing? >> Sidewalks and roads. >> Yeah. Well, I agree with David. I don't think we should call it a bike lane because I think that's we're almost forcing people to ride in the lane because I think that's what
legally is required. Of course, none of that's in the purview of our committee, but it's on the record. >> I mean, could you at least call it bike lane/houlder something so that it's clear that it's functioning? I mean, even the code itself,
I think we put language in saying that you don't have to put a shoulder and a bike lane because it was the same thing. >> Yes, the shoulder uh shoulder widths, the bike lane satisfies requirement for shoulder widths as well, >> right? So, it should probably be labeled as a bike lane/shoulder even if even if you want even if we think it is going to
be we can debate back and forth whether we should have bike lanes or not, but my point is that it's functioning as more than just a bike lane. And so that should be my opinion properly indicated on the graphic. >> Okay. >> Well,
say this to your point. If it's a 5 foot wide shoulder, whatever we want to call it, you're still going to block the right lane if you pull into it because your car broke down. So, you're not going to have any different effect on traffic
because they're still going to have to go in the next lane over to get around you if you're stopped. So, it doesn't really matter. >> Well, I don't know about that. I think if you because of our lane widths, I think that >> you guys made the lane widths from 12
feet to 11 ft. Made them narrower. So, I'll respectfully disagree with that. >> Well, we don't have the county engineer here. I guess I or anybody from traffic cops to know whether that's enough. >> I'm I'm not providing false testimony here. They made them 11 ft width
>> whereas the standard lane widths are 12 feet. >> So what's the average width of a car? Seven 8T seven vehicle seven >> six and change. >> Seven feet call it. So you're two feet if you're 5t into the all the way into the bicycle lane. You're two feet still into the lane.
>> They still got to go around. >> Yeah. So >> you still >> Yeah. You might have to go a little bit into the other lane, but you're it's still less. >> I encountered the problem on US19 this morning when two people who had a bumper scratcher of an accident decided to pull
off on the little shoulder in the median and then that blocked the entire left southbound lane US9. We were forced to get in the other lane to go around. Regardless, you have to go around that car. It's blocking the lane.
Only way around blocking the lane is they pull off on that multi-use path. >> Then maybe maybe we need a wider shoulder then. >> Well, with this there'd be a curb there, correct? >> From the road road level. >> That would depend if it's an urban or
>> Yeah. I don't know if it's urban or rural. If it's rural, it's less of an issue because you can just pull in the grass, too. I mean, >> there's no curve to bottom. >> Yeah. So, there's a curb. >> There we go. which makes it more difficult to pull off of the road into the grass in an emergency situation.
>> So, I've pulled up the at least one of our typical sections um as adopted in 19-136 if that helps provide any context. >> So, where's the curb in this? >> You can see the little >> any step there. >> Two feet
>> two feet immediately. >> Yeah, the two foot section there. See it, David? >> Yeah, I see it. >> Well, that style curb isn't so hard to drive over, is it? The old style. >> Well, those are the the ones in the
medium median are mountable. The ones on the outside edge. >> What did you say the standard width of a car was? What is What is the standard width of a car? >> Somewhere around six. Well, they vary by car, but average around six feet or so. Six to seven. >> Well, okay. If the bike lane's five
feet, you're still getting the majority of the car. >> Either way, you still got to get in the other lane. >> I don't I'm I'm real estate here. >> I'm not convinced that that you're >> you got the gutter, too. >> And then what are you going to do about
a semi-truck that's allowed to be 8 feet wide? >> Look, if you want to make the bike lane six feet, I'm all for it. I'm just saying I don't care what I'm all for paved shoulders. Have at it. I'm just saying let's get the bikes off the road. And I think
there's a certain commissioner who might be the chairman of the board that's probably going to push back about the bike lanes. That's all I'm saying. >> I I I don't disagree, but that's why I'm saying we should call them something other than bike lanes. Call them bike lanes or whatever it is. But
>> emergency lanes, >> multi whatever we want to call it. But but it I do think that having that five feet makes it safer during a breakdown. That was Danny what Mr. Moody says that I I think it gives some relief to the
uncommon other drivers. The car is six feet wide. I see six feet of see how you can get six feet of car in there. >> We're not arguing we're we're not arguing about the same thing. I'm not against having >> additional pavement width for shoulders.
I'm saying get the bicycles off of it. >> Okay. >> That's all I'm saying. Get the bikes off of it. Get the bikes on the multi-use path. That's why we're building 10 foot wide multi-use. >> Yeah. >> Okay. How about we just call it a bike lane or a shoulder?
>> Just call it a shoulder. >> To be clear, are we talking about actually revising language in the proposed LDC or just on the graphic? I think just the sections. There's no language in there. Is there is there language >> there reference to bike lane? >> There is a reference to a bike lane, but
it also the language in the code says it is the shoulder, too. >> Yes. >> So, I'm not sure there's a problem with the code. >> The code says it's functioning. It's serving as both functions. I I tend to think that that it is a
danger and I think calling it a bike lane is >> it's almost like telling people this is the lane you got to be in if you want to be on a bike >> and I rarely see people use it as a bike lane as well. >> You see these people with all the gear on and the helmets and everything, you
know, 15 in a row going down the bike lane. >> I thought that's why they're providing a 10ft trail. >> Exactly. Is that the whole pointing? That that's what I'm talking about. Why? >> I'm not opposed to shoulders. Have all the shoulders and emergency pulloff areas you want. >> Have you get the bikes off the road?
>> What if we call it a shoulder and then we decide later whether we're going to allow bikes on it? >> Well, the state law allows bicycles to ride down the road, too. I'm just saying you're stupid if you do it. >> Yeah. >> Right. And I we don't need to encourage people to do it. That's why we want to
invest in these multi-use paths is to get them off of the road so we can have a safe place to bicycle. And I'm sure there's a certain retired school board member that could come here and testify to that personally. >> That's correct. Yeah. I I've seen municipalities that designate a portion
of that multi-use trail as bicycle. You know, doesn't mean you can't walk on that section, but there's a little lane built into that painted onto that multi-use trail. And so that might be a better use to encourage that. You designate three feet of that 10t trail to a bike.
>> You see those rails to trails? They have bikes all over. >> They do. Yeah. >> But I've se I've seen it before where they actually have a lane designated for bikes. >> Yeah, I have too. >> On the multi-use. And >> just please don't put stop controls on the bike lanes like Newport Richie has
done because the people on the street don't understand that the up sign is for the bike path and not for the street. >> I know that's fairly confusing. Neither does Google Maps. >> I mean, I I guess ultimately the question is, you hit the nail on the head, Mr. Moody. If the streets are
allowed to use the road anyway, I mean, if the bikes are allowed to use the road anyway >> legally, >> wouldn't you rather have them on the outside edge in the shoulder than >> I don't want them. Well, I want to highly encourage them to use
the multiuse path that we're now going to obligate developers to build along vision roads. >> Correct. >> And all I'm suggesting to you, and I don't care because I'm still going to recommend approval of this thing, but I'm telling you when you get to the
board, there's a lady who's got a gamble up there, and I'm pretty sure she's going to tell you the same thing. >> I I don't I understand that. And what I'm saying is I don't want an overreaction that causes us to lose our shoulders. That's my issue. >> No, I don't want you to lose your shoulders. I'm going on the record. I am
completely in support of having adequately wide enough paved shoulders so that you can pull over in the event of David's Tesla runs out of electricity and he has to sit there for the next 12 hours while he charges. >> Terry, do you have a do you have a
suggestion to get solve this? >> Yeah, Mr. chairman. >> He charges it with >> Victoria Pitos playing development economic growth. Um there is work that's happening in the background on the right ofway typicals um with the county engineer. So we could look at the term
more comprehensively whether we denote it on the typicals as bike lane or as shoulder or as bike lane shoulder. There are other terms that are used um by like the GIS profession. Ezri ARJS calls them edge lane roads or ELRs, advisory bike
lanes, advisory shoulders. There's there's a slew of terms that we could debate internally as to what we should actually call them. But for the purposes of this graphic, we could simply remove it and just be just be silent on it for for at least the intent here since this
is really intended for 10 foot >> multi-use beds. And and Terry, just the point we're trying to make is we don't care what It's not a semantic argument over what we call it. We all understand that it is
safer for the bicyclist to use the multi-use trail that we're going to require be constructed than to ride in the traffic lane or on the side of the traffic lane. That's the whole point of having the multi-use trail. Otherwise, we just call it a sidewalk.
>> Understood. And don't disagree. So for additional clarity here, um there are certain sections that are a proposed amendment here that does refer to bike lanes. So is the guidance here to maybe remove bicycle references to bicycle lanes for
now because >> my preference would be to replace it with whatever term Terry comes up with that. >> Okay. this multifunctional thing, whatever. >> I don't know what the right term is, but >> the shoulder. >> The shoulder or whatever, whatever it
is. >> Terry made it sound like there's some new term of art that's used for these things that I'm not opposed to using, but I think the concern you're hearing is designated as a as a bike lane as a
problem because it implies that that's the purpose of it. >> Got it. when it I don't think anybody thinks that should be the purpose the sole purpose of that pavement >> understood. >> It means you're encouraging people to use it as such. >> Okay. >> Which is not good. >> There was a time when that was probably
okay. I remember when I first went to the University of Florida and I was enthralled at the city of Gainesville who had these lanes for bicycles on the side of the road. But we didn't have these in 1982.
Okay. Once we got traffic changed the change the equation. >> So, Mr. Chairman, just to clarify my earlier comment, it's the Federal Highway Administration >> in their small town and rural multimodal network guide that identifies these as
edge lane roads or advisory shoulders by FHWA. So, that's a federal term. >> Advisory shoulders. >> Yeah, that doesn't >> advisory shoulders. I'm okay with >> that. Doesn't say bikes. I like it when it doesn't say bikes. >> Doesn't matter. They're shut down.
It's true. >> I mean, it it it's clearly not a place where you want cars driving fast either. It's >> No, we don't want any cars driving fast down either. >> That's why the term advisory shoulder is a good term. It's >> motorcycle. >> I actually like call it a bike lane.
That's all we're saying. >> I like advisory shoulders. >> If we just wanted a place for people to walk, we won't need we don't need them 10 feet wide either. >> Exactly. So, >> right, but if we're talking about the five feet, >> if we're talking about encouraging
bicycles, we need a 10p wide. >> I agree on the multi trail. We're just the the issue is what are we going to call the five feet >> the shoulder? >> Well, for the purposes of this hearing, can we leave it out entirely?
Is there >> Well, I think >> or do we need to come up with a term before we >> I think the problem is the code does refer to a bike lane. I think that's the >> m Mr. Chair, if I can add uh Patrick D um development review.
>> So we 9016 already has shoulders covered as I'm sure the engineers up there know. So we have a section that talks to shoulders um already. So I don't know how this is going to interplay with each other, but I just wanted to point that out. So if we're changing the name of
what a shoulder may be, maybe we're changing that code section as well. Now granted 9016 is generally talking about um subdivision collector and lower so subdivision collector local roads even minor rural subdivision has a small little shoulder on it. We're talking
about vision roads right that's covered by our vision road typicals which I believe there we're intending to update uh in the notsodistant future. So there's different hierarchy of things that are at play here. So if we're
talking about changing terms, I think we need to look at it a little bit more holistically. Just a thought. >> Well, in in the land of in this section of the code with what's proposed underneath the bicycle lanes, you got subsection one, two, and three. Can we just delete two and three and leave it to where it says it shall be constructed
accord with the adopted typical sections? Then when the typical sections are updated, they'll be called whatever they decide to be called. >> I am not opposed to that. >> Me sounds good to me. >> Sounds good to me. Okay, >> brilliant.
>> You should probably make a motion, Jane. >> So moved. Did you get that? >> Yeah, I've got to follow up the hierarchy here, but it's sub subsection two and three under bicycle lanes for arterial and collector roads. Just going
to strike those two subsections. >> I would second that. >> Motion, a second. Further discussion? All in favor? Signify by saying I >> I like sign. >> Want to go home. >> Okay.
Problem solved. >> Thank you. >> Confidence that Terry can come up with a good name for >> Oh, yeah. >> typical section. >> Absolutely. >> Carrying the weight of the world. >> The weight of the world on his shoulders. >> Got a lot riding on your shoulders there, Terry. Thank you.
>> Thanks for your time. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> You thought it was going to be quick, didn't you? >> Did you all make >> That was just a motion to strike those sections. We need a motion on the >> balance of the item. >> Oh, >> so I'll I'll move approval. >> Second. I have a motion and a second.
Any further discussion? All in favor? Signify by saying I I post like sign. >> Okay. All right. I hear another motion. >> We have enough fun for one day. Move uh to adjourn. >> Second. All
>> in favor? >> I I All right. Close enough. >> I [Music] [Music]