The item before you today is the CL Shady Hills MPU. It's PD26788. This is a proposed zoning amendment from a C2 general commercial district to an MPU 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 Hill 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. The subject site is located the east side of Shady Hills Road, just south of County Line Road. And to note, there is a low point on the northeastern corner of the subject site. There's the commercial developments that you'll see to the northern extend of Shady Hills
Road currently drains to. And there is 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 a zoning map, the existing zoning C2 general commercial district. And it's
important to note that in 2015 there was a conditional use approved CU1517 to allow a 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
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 MPD 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 the 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 tunnels homes will be 18 foot in width with 90 foot in depth. The minimum dimensions we 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. Another thing to note is a maximum of 50% of the total town home buildings within the
development may consist of eight units. And then of the 8-unit town home buildings, they shall not be constructed directly adjacent to another 8 unit 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-foot 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, Del Webb is constructing an 8-oot path on both sides of Shady Hills Road from Canyon Ridge Road to Cruise Lake Drive. The county has plans to put a 5-ft sidewalk on the
east side of Shady Hills Road, which is currently a 30% design and is anticipated to begin construction in fiscal year 26, spanning from Cruise 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 Hill 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 request not to provide an interconnect to the north south or east due the existing site conditions that make it not feasible to provide an interconnect. As I mentioned earlier to the north of
subject site is an existing onwater storm water onsite storm water retention pond that pro provides retention for the sites to the north of subject site extending to the corruption uses that are located at the intersection. Shady Hills Road and County Line Road, which will need to be modified to accommodate
the proposed development. On the southern portion of the subject site, there's an existing storm water pond that serves the eastern side of Shady Hills Road and won't need to be also modified for the new portions of Shady Hills rideway, 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 feastable. Given the site constraints, the public purpose of the southern pond accommodate retention for the public rideway and the additional pedestrian connectivity added to facilitate circulation.
PTE is immunable 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 rideway preservation table corridor
width for Shady Hills Road from 166 ft to 124 ft. PTE has met with the applicant and the county engineer and at the adisement 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 the requested variation meets the intent of the code and this comes with recommendation
approval conditions from any question. >> 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. 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 it's 400 and some >> Yeah. 400 and some multif family units >> based on that across >> and how far did you say the sidewalks were >> um in width or where they're
>> the length that they're putting in along Shadyville 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 MPD boundary to Shady Hills. >> Yeah, I believe it's roughly 2300 square feet um >> linear feet, sorry. um for that portion that's expanding from the southern
boundary to Shady Hills Elementary. >> It's a 5 foot wide side. >> Um it's an 8 foot wide repeatable >> and then do you know how long the frontage is on the property? >> Um I don't off find that out for you though. that up.
>> Yes, sir. >> Yes. >> It's a long way. >> Will he 6327 Grand Boulevard Newport for the applicant? I do have a short PowerPoint
>> and we're going to see who gets it first, Mr. seminarian. >> Oh man. >> Anyhow, if you'd like for me to present in the meantime um to keep this moving, I'd be happy to. >> Give you the answer to get it. >> Oh, yeah. Go ahead. Go ahead.
>> What a politician. >> Soon as my PowerPoint comes up, I'll get going. few people. >> Right. So on behalf of the applicant, we're bringing this project forward. The current land use is RO um which allows a
maximum density of it's 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 zone. But 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- multi- family units that have been approved on this property. We're proposing to do an MTUD that takes away the commercial zoning on this property and the multifamily and replaces it with plyed town homes which significantly significantly reduces the
um transmission 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 Persian Hills Road by the fact that we have to convey right away 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. We go through what is what do you want for this corridor? What is used for right of way? What are we doing about all 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 transition corridor. I didn't come up with that. It was actually your your county engineer who is updating all of the tables um preservation tables together with the 2050 2050 comp plan update. So we're getting that information and we're
incorporating 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 uh 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 town homes. As I mentioned, we're reducing the traffic potential and we're doing 6% of the of the project that be going for um infrastructure for the ride
ofway. We're building 20 2,300 L offsite 8 foot sidewalk to Shane Hill Elementary School and we're doing onsite the guys design what the onsite is the portion how long is the portion? >> 2,000 >> 2,000. So between the two 4,300 linear
feet of 8 foot sidewalks. The counties, I always say this in 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 8
ft. So, this is the binding concept plan. We were asked to do a binding concept plan for this project. Um, and we we 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. 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 can 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 more conditions of approval for town home projects. The other thing that we're exceeding is even
though TM26 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 generator. You compare what's allowed on the property, what's a matter of right pursuant to 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 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 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, 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 foot queuing lane um into Shady Hills Elementary, which is south of our sidewalk in 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 rightway in the travels for Shady Hills
over onto a queuing lane so that traffic no longer cues on the travel lane. So that's been an improvement and it was done in about four months between when it was we were requested to do that it was constructed maybe five months between agreements and actual
construction. So, I I know we'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 had another reasoning. Maybe they'll reference um the board county commission 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 off and down along Shad Hills Road regarding pedestrians and queuing for school traffic. And that's what I have. 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 with you as a public hearing item, the county attorney's office staff, the county engineer. It's a whole bunch of time. I'd make a lot of money on it, but but other than that, the county having an actual condition 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're 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, the terms of how we do this offsite sidewalk. >> 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 sighted sidewalk credits for anything above between the five foot and the 8 foot. >> That's correct.
>> Want to make sure that was disclosed that >> Yes. >> You're not building all of that for free. >> No, >> that's true. However, 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 credible against your bike ped portion. Thank you J. >> Any questions for that 100,000 that's the maximum of what
have >> you get that Richard? Yeah, the countyy's paying cash for the difference in some county that's offset >> part of the language that's being negotiated. >> Yes. >> With that, >> yes, a cash reimbursement over 100,000.
>> I had a question on the um school district wants to kick in any money for that. >> We'll let you Yeah. Oh, the storm to the north. I want to see a picture of that. >> While they're pulling that up that Oley
Drive, all that stuff is to the south of the school. >> It is. And there's a gap between the school and drive. Um, but there also is a thousand foot queuing lane right there that was just put in so 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, I'm looking on the area 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.
>> Sort of in the norththeast corner. Yes, northeast corner and there's a south kind of west corner. We can show some a dip in the top too map. It's also on the concept plan as well, I think. Right.
>> Yeah, I think that's Yeah, right there. >> Okay. And then also I wanted to know like the property owners the same property owner to the north is developed. Make sure you have that sidewalk there. >> Yes. The county you have 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 had a commercial piece comes in they do a five foot sidewalk. But I know you have a code code change before you today
for your second review um to make that to strengthen those requirements. So >> and that conditional use was approved in 2015. I saw it >> still in effect or still
>> there are still there right? >> That's it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. idea. >> Okay. >> There's something I mentioned about that northern buffer. >> Go ahead. >> I was just wondering why we would need
that. Right. >> So, we have been asked to do binding plans and put more detail onto into our MPDS and so we're addressing things like our part application and our buffers and at the zoning level. That's why that's
why that is built. You know, you put the buffer and then you're going to have to take down It's not going to be use something commercial. >> No, I mean the buffer is on our side. So, and the commercial will have to buffer for the residential.
>> Okay. >> The first individual I have signed up to speak is a Julia Bar. I apologize if I butchered your last name. Uh the next official that we have after that is a Linda Farmer Julie Orton 2645
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 Shea Hills need to be contiguous, not just one
development at a time. The sidewalks need to be in place first. One of my friends's sons died a teenager as the um you well know died a few days before Christmas one here on Shady Hills Road
going to a different school. So 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. 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 and 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. Shake Hills. First thing I want I'm going to try to keep
>> farmers 51 co 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 because of me. That was because I sat on 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 Tiny Line Road for many years. It is a notional road. I don't care. Do whoever wants to tell me that I'm
wrong, please do. Let's tell you on October 7, 2025, Fernando County decided 5 to zero to deny the 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 5 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, they have to go out onto Shady Hills Road. It's falling apart. I'll hand this to her and you guys can look at this. Is what we're driving on on
Shady Hills Road. So, you want to pass that to them. It's a quarter inch thick. It sits on top of a bunch of sand. It's failing, right? We're going to get sidewalks. You know, you put the sidewalks down the entire side of the opposite road. >> We have a motion to receive file.
>> Stop with time. Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I like sign. >> I feel this board passes this based on the fact that the county two counties Pasco and Hernando cannot get their crap
together over who's going to widen the road. It took forever to get a white put a 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 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, you know, they started with a plastic plan and then that just opened it up for everything else. And, you know, I'm really I'm really upset that uh
>> Listen, I lost my home and my acreage 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. Fingering 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 Nco 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. There's 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 the 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 no, five to. And that's that's that's big for 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
>> Let me ask you one question. Where is your home in relation to this area here, please? >> 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 at. The water go by Web. 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 unacceptable 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. It 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 playing with you guys. Jack Mariano, I'm holding him personally responsible for letting a million dollars of paid 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. >> The next individual I have signed up is Pastor Jen. And after that, we have Great. >> Jen, where can you get your name in the text, please? Yes, sir. Pastor Jen
Carowatch, 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 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 credit. 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 paid attention and because it's very important to me and 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 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 her development from the sheriff. 30 months. 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 reason, 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 Wilhight, 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. But one thing I think you're you do tend to overlook
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 taking it down to 160 units and I think that's a big improvement of
what somebody could have done there. I think it's a 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 have obligations to everybody in this
county. And you can't always look at the downside. You got to 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 is as they now can put there.
And the difference between 160 and 430 is a big drop and it 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. >> Jed,
just point correction. 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 that first meeting, it was when Barbara was presenting Dell Web had your your followers here, the folks from
Shady Hills here, and you were complaining about the curve. 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 Ms. Will height 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 5- foot wide sidewalk. He's building an 8- 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 Miss Farmer's posts on Facebook. We do recognize the deaths that are happening on Shady Hill Road. Miss
Wilhight went out of her way to get a 1,000 foot along with Commissioner Mariano to get a 1,000 ft per lane built to accommodate school opening. You are
being heard. We are listening to you. And to Mr. Gay's point, there's 400 and something units already approved. We we don't approve this today. Someone could 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 away for the two-lane Shady Hills is 66 ft, but it's 124 feet proposed for the
widening of Shady Hills at some point. Um, and this applicant is actually dedicating an additional 29 ft, which is their half of that rightway 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 built. 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. Simmon or staff to address that issue, which is whether the sidewalk will need to be torn up when Shady Hills is the same. I don't think that was staff's intent was to do
credits for a sidewalk that would have to be torn up. So, I just want that to be clarified on the record. >> Thank you. County Chair, >> there was a receipt and file for the road debris. Do you want us to retain that for the record? >> Yeah.
>> Yes. >> If so, then we need the rocks. Excuse me. >> I think Where did the rocks go? >> The rocks. It gives them to the clerk. That'd be great. >> For the record.
>> They come with it, too. He's a take. >> Thank you. >> Whoever can speak to the allegation that the sidewalks are going to be torn up when the roaded wires. >> Yes. Joe Simino W engineering 12363
Hampton Park Boulevard 33624. Good afternoon. Um, we are giving up 29 ft 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 rightway dedication. So, it will never have to move from that location. Thank you.
>> So, so is there anyone from staff that can confirm that that 124 feet of proposed right away that's inclusive of the winding of Shady Hills Road as well as any additional sidewalks that are others? Yes, I
need to speak. >> While they are finding the answer to that question, we did have one more individual sign. >> We know that. So, we're going to make sure they can speak. Go ahead. William clarification. William I didn't want to cut in line.
>> Way over million planning development economic growth. Yes. So, to confirm Mr. Pa's point it is 124 ft 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 ft into a 12t
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 county wants to do as well as have enough room for this path.
>> Correct. That is the exact dimensions of the the rightway typically. >> Bottom line is the sidewalk through building will not need to be ripped out. >> That is correct. Uh like Mr. Simino said specifically along their project back
and then to the extent of our the PDN happening fitting their sidewalk improvements to the south with the rideway constraints. >> It does the children have a safe place to walk until the road is widened. If it means we got to spend whatever
money it is to keep the kids safe, then so be it. >> Okay, let's see. Are you ready to speak? >> Yes, sir. I'm ready. >> Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> You give us your name and address, please. >> Uh, yes. My name is Diane Grady. I live
at 18135 Rolls Royce 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 instead 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 go Pass 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'd 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 but 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 Shady Hills Elementary. I agree that there is
no turning left going 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 this 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 I'm um you know as I always say
people may not be familiar with the area but our area is as much as tension 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 different parts of the street and drivers are not slowing down at all. >> Thank you. Do you have any questions? >> 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. >> Um so it's you know 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
>> use Shady Hills Road regularly >> and we'll continue to advocate for the people of Shady Hills. Interesting. 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 saying 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 Go Pascal is trying to work a um a service for them. But if we have more more uh commissioners concerned about
the area that that would make a difference. >> Okay. But thank you. >> Thank you very much for your time. Well, you have a comment on that question. First, I'm a 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 Ring Road. Both roads were mentioned. The county is working on signalization there within this fiscal
year. So you have signalization schedule and where >> little range road. >> Little range road. Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> William, I have a question for you. >> And it says the county line road and Shady Hills are going to function fine.
Shady Hills and Shady Road are going to function fine. Um my question is it assumes a 3% background growth rate. Are you comfortable with that rate of growth
given the going on in this area? >> Steve's here and 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 derives 3% instead of a 2% minimum for his historical growth assumptions in the access management. 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. Yes, Mr. Chair. We have no other individuals sign up to speak. >> Is there anybody online?
>> There are no individual sign ups. >> 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 that the first speaker talking about sidewalks need to be in place first. The condition that we have is prior to the
first 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 this sidewalk will be in place
down to the school before the first child is in our in our neighborhood. So, I want to point that out. >> And I know it's unrelated to this case at Dell Web. The developer gave the
right of way to fix the curb. 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 is actually good. There's no time period on conditional use.
What is the I don't know if this is a question for you Barbara or for the county. What's the standard forment of lighting on a road like that when you put a sidewalk? >> Answer question. >> Sure. I think the condition requires us
to comply with the code but I am not sure um how the light works. >> Anybody from the county have that answer? There's a you see see William I'm on the hunt. I'm
gonna pull up that section of code that the COA is referencing. >> Okay. Well, was brought up. So, I think if we can get an answer, at least they'll have some idea what what to expect. And >> 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
>> to light the public right of way. That would be something the county works out with the power company. >> See what it says. That's our second. >> Can everyone hear me? >> Yes. >> Mr. Movies, correct? 901,
which is what we're referencing here for the the street lighting is the uh the internal portions of the Mut. They're bound by that section of code. The actual rideway that the county has would be our company and the county working that out.
It would be there. But is there a criteria like when that should occur? >> Can't be accept the whim of the county too. >> That' be probably a question for the county engineer. You might need to look in the FDOT green book to see if there's
>> sections of 54 that are on >> near Little Rose. >> Sure. >> So, >> yeah. I just uh I'm just trying to get them some relative expectation, you know, and it's not the developer's responsibility, but it is
>> 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 along with >> there is a condition of approval 22D that the method of lighting for all non
local roads will be submitted at times the uh the record class submitt for each unit or phase. So this being a non-local road >> be submitting it the method of lighting at the regular glass submitt for each unit >> or phase of development.
>> 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 >> there may be a standard there. I just don't think we have a person here to answer that question. >> Yeah. She's saying it's not a land development code requirement. It to be a
roadway design require. >> They probably knew the answer 30 years ago when I was first here. I don't remember it anymore. >> So that's right. >> Well, if anybody would you would I'm sure
why I asked you. I just wanted 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 answers some of the questions of the uh
of the people in the audience that have questions about lighting. Any other questions? Any questions as far as that roadway? I don't know what is what's the timeline for that. as a million dollar question, multi-million dollar.
>> I don't think it's in the fiveyear CIP. The question is where is it >> in any longer term plans? >> I think 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 if they
actually have >> the board directed that project be moved up as a priority. That was about maybe a month and a half ago. I don't know the status is constants knows about that because it's a county capital improvement program.
>> Okay. >> I'm just looking at the study that was done. It says there's no improvements in the fire. >> Dr. Panos, assistant county engineer working for the transportation engineering department. Um um Mr. Daniel
correctly said that we got a direction from the board to move up the priority for shak 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 winding of uh shady her road. First we have to do the route study to assess where the winding is going to happen on the east side or the west side or center. 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 up to two years and then we have to go
into the rightway acquisition because obviously we will need the right away to uh accommodate four lengths of shady hills and then of course we have construction so it's going to be a lengthy process not just going to happen tomorrow 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, >> 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 RA.
>> So hopefully in the next fiscal year getting the the process started basically start. >> Okay. Well, could you hurry it up a little bit? >> The good thing is we're in next year. It's fiscal 26, end of October one. a U
well and he's saying very politely obviously 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 Barb'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 If everybody doing it at us the rightway, we probably build this road twice as fast as what he just mentioned.
>> Pastor J, if you're listening, yes, you need to get out there and get that right away for >> rally rally the property owners and have them dedicate 20 29 ft. >> But >> each side >> each side. >> But I mean, but we sort of had to figure
out where to use some preliminary route study and design to figure out who needs to give us the right first. That's correct. >> When we can knock on doors, we have to design it, >> right? So, yeah, it might be 60. >> Yeah. >> Six feet on one side and ft on.
>> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Anything else? A chance to speak. >> Motions, please. Any motions?
I'd move to approve item PC2. This is a net benefit for the community. They understand the passions of the people in Shady Hills. But at the end of the day, the choice we
have today is 400 and some odd apartments or 160 cladded town homes. I'll 160 cladded town homes over 400 apartments any day. Yeah, I agree. >> Second
that. >> Any further discussion on the motion? >> I just wanted to stay 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 proposing. Um, and um, I think this is the right move considering what's already on place and what's already approved. So, just want to state that for the record.
Okay, we have a motion to second. Any other discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying I >> opposed like sign. Okay, motion carries. I will also point out just we do
this kind of thing happens. Okay. >> Good afternoon, Commissioners. Kurt Cyerson, planning development. >> Have to ask your silence back there if you don't mind. Prime. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon, B commission members.
I'm Kurt Cyber, planning development growth. Presenting the Rowan Industrial MPD PD 26782 located in West Pasco County. The site's location is illustrated by the red star. We're in Commissioner Jagger's district.
ition today is a reszoning 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 abing immediately south of Alderman Lane, a private residential roadway. The development does not
propose a connection or utilization of alderman. The site maintains a P2 professional zoning classification boundary illustrated in pink. The current future land use is res 6 residential 620s 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 IO industrial light supporting the MPD user. The
comprehensive plan amendment has been given an recommendation of approval by the planning commission and heads to the board of county commissioners for adoption slated for the 129 public hearing. The Ron 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 perspective row
industrial MPD is characterized by both residential communities and a non-residential development pattern. The residential users are primarily single family detached homes, multif family residential complexes. The non-residential pattern here is mostly comprised of commercial users. A budding
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 by
industrial uses LDC section 528. Access of the subject development is illustrated by the arrows on Roman road. A variation has been requested by the applicant from LDC section 805, specifically 805.6
restrictions on postdevelopment 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, drains areas, common areas, landscape areas, wetland areas, buffer
areas, preservation, conservation areas, and other special purpose areas without planning or advanced to a CDD. PTE is amanable to this request as it accomplishes the intent of FOD 5.6 being that maintenance of this area takes place even without a CD.
In conclusion, PTE recommends approval of reszoning petition item PE 267882. Thank you for your time and consideration if you have any question. >> You want to address this petition that was handed over? >> 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 on fairly to forego the following uses of the I1 semi district. Boat manufacturing, laundry or clothes cleaning or dying establishments, creatory, recycling operations, shooting ranges, medical
waste disposal facilities, auction houses, construction and the demolition debris disposal facilities, yard trash disposal facilities, and wholesale storage of chemicals, gasoline or liqufied petroleum gas.
>> Any questions? applicant present. Anyone here to object? >> Good afternoon again. Barbara Boheight 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. Polar is 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 them into this condition. Um that's how this came to be 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 but I think this is agreeable to
him. But let's let him speak if if we could and then um we'll do a followup 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 need to update that requirement, but we had to bring it forward as an NPD. We actually our comp plan came to you a
long time ago. The comp plan to industrial has been sitting while we had to come for an NPU. 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 the buffering to the property. into this particular project and that
took a while to bring forward and it's 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 more um
appropriate setback for light industrial but that's the reason why you see this as an MPD. 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,
multiple to work with staff to bring forward and fix the code so we don't have to do some of these things that are take time cost property. >> Any questions? Question is five. You look at that show by word
of the mountain. So, I think that's just saying that whatever association they create, first of all, they're having they have an exception at the very end of this that says they're not going to do this for
um it's all under one ownership, which which they're probably going to do, but the reference is school board just says that any common association or CD not includes schoolboard property. that standard language
for all zoning conditions to make sure that you're not subject to any CDD or HOA assessments. That's for your benefit. >> Yeah. >> Unless you want to start paying those. >> Yeah.
>> But you're going to pay in a road take any money they can give us for Chris doesn't ask this question. Okay, I think we have one person that want to speak. Come forward. Please state your name and address.
>> Good afternoon. My name is Dan Coler, 7319 Alderman Lane. If it's possible, they can bring up the Google map picture of the said property. This will give you guys a little bit insight. Sure. Yeah. 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. Five years ago, six years ago, I don't know the exact date deconstruction was involved. They went ahead and got preliminary plans involved with a set detention 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 leech field? 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 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 opposing.
I just don't like the wetland setback to maximize what their building wise is. So far again, >> I'm the corner lot. It's right there with the arrows right there. Yes, sir. >> So, we're going to be careful here because I think the preliminary plan
that you're talking to was 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, 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 I have to ask Mr. Gerardi because I
think he was the engineer for that system. But it's not uncommon 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 ft and that I can't
speak to the specifics but I think Jamie did design that. >> 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 the maxing out the law 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 a 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 here we're not looking at the sight specific design we're looking at whether the zoning is appropriate 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 they have all of chapter 62 330 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 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. I just want to clarify one thing. So part of this process, the one more people deviation they're doing 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 >> setbacks to the north? His properties to the north, correct?
>> Yes, sir. >> Right here. >> 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. >> Set back required to this gentleman's property >> gentlemen >> because I 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 hear you. >> I do 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 for many years. 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 he thinks
>> maybe happening. Yeah, >> he's maybe he doesn't want us to grant some deviations from the code. >> I'm not sure whether you're granting any deviation from the code that would affect him because I think the only deviation that you're arguably granting is it's a setback to the east.
Yeah, the two objectives the only the only two things I had the conditional section three total was the one which we talked we agreed to they 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 that was 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 aviation on the north side, but >> David, can I ask you for a clarification? >> And maybe it's better asked for staff. >> The zoning map shows that the property to the east is MF2, which is a
residential type 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 or is it being considered residential? I
believe they consider it agricultural because they only identified I'll let staff answer because they only alerted to me that there was an issue to the east. This is not this is a staff question. The write up only says that the 150 foot
yard would normally only be required to the east. the the code defines agricultural district to include AR agricultural residential. So it it's considered by >> So you're not applying the 150 yard 150
foot free clear yard set back to the agricultural zoning. >> Correct. And so what Kurt and Miss Wilhigh did was a type B buffer consistent with the 9052 matrix, the buffering in between industrial and residential.
>> Okay. And that buffer is 15 ft. >> 15 ft. And then a 25 ft set back. >> Is that from the property line? >> Yes, sir. >> So be a total 40. >> Okay. >> Excuse me, but uh Jamie, the engineer for project. >> Yeah.
>> You mean to confirm? >> Yeah. Okay. Uh Jamie Gerardi, Regency design and engineering 9400 River Crossing Boulevard, sweet 102. Um just to clarify a couple things just
for the record. 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 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 of hard time. Okay. But you're you're agreeing that
the setback requirement is not affecting the >> Well, I mean that 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 setback was not going to affect his leechfield.
>> That's the only thing he seems to be concerned about. >> Well, it's storm water. It's total 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. He explained to me and Miss Money said there's still going to be held to the land development code. Then I don't oppose it. No. >> Still hoping staff answer 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 including district? I can't tell. So >> I think you said yes because the treatment as an agriculture. >> I I've accepted staff answer that doesn't require 150 foot.
I'm asking whatever side is you are imposing what is it consistent with what we normally require in the code? >> This would be by one. proposed. >> Yes, it is consistent. The 25P is
consistent with the 528 front setback in addition to a type E buffer which is also consistent of 95 >> setback to answer the gentleman's question. The applicant is not requesting any deviation from what would be the normally required setback on the
north. >> Okay. >> And just to point something out to 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.
>> Okay. I think we're there. All right. Is there anybody else that needed to speak? If not, I hear a motion. Move approval. >> Second. >> Second. >> Motion second. Further discussion. All in favor signify. I like sign.
carries with the note that already is abstained of course. >> Well, can the motion make clarify that for the revised condition? >> Oh yes. Yeah. So that motion to include the revised condition 25. >> Still second. Still vote I. All in
favor? >> I I still Okay. Uh, Mr. Chair, currently beginning PC6 and PC7, would you like to take a break? >> Yes, I would. >> Five minutes.
>> We're not Right. All >> the next item that we have general government. The next item we have on the agenda is item PC6 and you'll be sitting as the local planning agency for this item. PD2600022
and ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code section 13.22 to two mobility fees to clarify the 2025 mobility fee schedules do not expire on December 31st, 2025 and
then other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability for Kaylor providing forability and inclusion to the land development code and an effective date presented by staff. >> Thank you. [Music]
Afternoon gentlemen vocalist 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 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 have any comments from See any have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Second. Further discussion. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Like sign.
>> Thank you. [Music] >> PC7. You will also be sending us to sign up. PE 260002 an ordinance by the pass county commissioners amending the pass county land development code section 522.9
connected city master plan unit development district section 901 infrastructure standards section 901 transportation corridor facing section 901.6 6 street design identification requirements. Section 901.7 bicycle facilities section 901.8 pedestrian
facilities appendix A definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability for dealer privability excuse me inclusion issue the pass county land development code and an effective date codes by staff.
>> Thank you. >> Can you guys hear me? Okay. >> Yeah. Fantastic. Back planning development economic growth here uh again to present PE26002 infrastructure standards plan development code amendment.
Okay. So really quickly um the intent of this ordinance update is to update certion code for internal consistency consolidating sections 911.7 and 91.8 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 nonmotorized 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 the 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 countyy's typical sections. 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 8 as they exist today currently do um exempt anything below res three. 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 MPD 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 panels counties system, which allows developers to build where the sidewalk is needed rather than putting it on the
site or to the site. So what we are proposing with our payment and move option um functions similarly in situations where it's not feasible to construct a sidewalk or lease path or where there's already a
path programmed within 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 pair. I did review Panel County's land development code. to look at 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 Penelis 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 91.8, 8. We're updating that to the
911.7. 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 91.7 um are applicable to arterial and
collector road designs. Um oh and we're updating 91.6 street design 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 land development code. Currently, 917 and 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 12T multi-use path. Pedestrian facilities are required on all street types except
for alleys. Um on collector and arterial, 5ft sidewalks are required and 4ft 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
rural residential one future land use and it varies by street type. So again, we're proposing 10 foot multi-use pave trails on both sides of arterial and collector roads, 5ft sidewalks on one side and 8 foot side or multi-use pave trails on the other side of a
subdivision collector and 5ft 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 and bicycle network. They all principal structures have to be connected to each other. And parking lots with 100 more spaces have to provide a safe direct path from the parking lot to the building entrances. A little later in our uh process and
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 require we're providing a payment in L construction option. So again, where it's not feasible to build a sidewalk or
multi-use path, applicants can pay in le um and and um we can use that money to build a 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. >> B for payment in loop. >> 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 a stamp of approval. accounting attorney that quick review it. >> Uh he would get a 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
Penllis County? I I don't recall her name, >> but if there's a process that they're using Penllis County that's >> I would tell you to reach out to Jean Crossen,
>> okay, >> who's the develop manager, >> okay, >> 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 site 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.
>> 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. We want sidewalks. We want production. I don't mean this to sound insulting.
I do understand there's a process even for demonstrating that you're taking only the right 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 or you give them a co, you'll have the sidewalk today, 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 L 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? Okay. So, that's the big difference is
we we talked about the east and the south, I think. So, now this is just slowing the difference and we're going on both sides everywhere. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions or comments back to your table? Maybe it's one or two more slides.
>> This one? >> Yes. So, where's the 12 foot multi-use path go? That's the piece that we're changing. So, we were proposing a 12oot multi-use path on one side, the south of the east
side, and we've changed it to propose a 10 foot path. >> The left column is what it was >> correct. >> Right column is >> Okay. So, go back to the diagram again. >> So, on your subdivision collectors, it
actually isn't symmetrical, right? So it's 5 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 5T and >> no. In that particular section, we wrote
language say put it on one side, but if there's an existing alignment, you have to go for that alignment. >> The question about the graphic for the vision roads. It says you want a 10-ft multi-use path on each side. 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 mph or less road, it'll just be the bike lane. >> It means we have both, but if it's a 40 m per hour or less road, it would be marked as a bike lane.
>> Say I'm not supportive of bike lanes. Pretty sure one of the commissioners will give you give you some push back about bike lanes. I call them suicide lanes.
>> 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 stop calling them bike lane. Nobody ever listens to me >> turning
>> 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 see 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 bicycle. >> We should start calling it shoulder/bike lane. 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 pave shoulder. >> That's That's effectively what that is. >> Yeah. But multi-use path that seems to me you can drive a bike on that.
>> Yeah, pretty much. That's why it's called multi-use. What 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. 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. >> 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. I see people in wheelchairs riding into bike lanes. that get them off. That's why we're building these multi-use paths. If we need shoulders, I'm all
about shoulders. That's fine. Get the bicycles off of adjacent to the track. >> Very dense urban areas, you know, where it's 15 miles an hour or less or something like that. But >> by a car, but 15 miles an hour, it still hurts. >> Well, my only point is is that if you
have the width there, >> if you decide to take out the striking 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's my concern. >> To Eric's point,
if the road was if the road is going to be designed for 45 mph, then you wouldn't have a shoulder, >> right? You actually lose width of the road, which is counterintuitive for a faster speed limit. >> Oh, it's probably useful there, too. I
don't disagree with >> the one thing we need just everybody to keep in mind is the rightway width doesn't change. So you start adding extra 5T for a sidewalk, extra 5 foot for multiuse trail, extra room for a shoulder, you're taking away green space, you're taking away landscape trees that
>> 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. I agree with David. I don't think we should call it a bike lane. I think
that's we're almost forcing people to ride that lane because I think that's what lately is required. None of that's in the purview of our committee. But it's on the record. >> I mean, can you at least call it bike
lane slashholder 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 in a bike lane because it was the same thing. >> Yes. The shoulder shoulder widths the bike lane satisfies requirement for
shoulder widths as well. >> Right. So, 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. So that should be my opinion properly indicated on the graphic. >> Okay. >> Well, I'm just 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. You made them narrower. So, respectfully disagree with that.
>> We don't have a county engineer here. for anybody from traffic cops to know whether that's enough. >> I'm not providing false testimony here. They made them 11 ft width whereas the standard lane widths are 12 feet. >> It's the average width of the car 7 8 ft
seven vehicle >> seven 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. See, >> but you might have a little bit into the other lane, but you're it's still less.
>> I encountered the problem on US 19 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 southbound US9. We forced to get in the
other lane to go around and regardless you have to go around that car. It's blocking the lane. way of not blocking the lane is if they pull off on that multi-use path. >> 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 if it's rural it's less of an issue because you can spool the grass too. Yes, it has occurred. Makes it more difficult to pull off of
the road into the grass emergency situation. >> So, I 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 skinny step there. Two feet. >> Two feet immediately adjacent to the bike lane. foot section. See there? >> Yeah, I see. Well, that style curve isn't so hard to drive over, is it? The old style.
>> Well, those are 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 the standard width of a car? somewhere around six. Well, they vary by car, but average around six feet or so.
Six to seven feet. >> 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 creating real estate here. >> I'm not convinced that that you're
>> What are you going to do about a semi truck that's allowed to be 8t 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. Not like I'm not >> I don't disagree, but that's why I'm saying we should call them something other than bike lanes. Call them bike lanes shoulders or whatever it is, but
emergency lines. multi whatever we want to call it but but it I do think that having that five feet makes it safer during a breakdown outstanding what Mr. Everybody says that I think it gives some relief to the
uncommon. 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 argu We're not arguing about the same thing. >> Not against having additional pavement 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 bites on the multi-use path. That's why we're building 10 foot wide multi-use. >> How about we just call it a bike lane or a shoulder? >> Call it a shoulder.
>> To be clear, are we talking about actually revising language in the proposed LBC or just on the graphic? I >> think just the sections. There's no language in there, is there? the reference to bike lane and >> 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 tend to think that that it is a danger and I think agreement at 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 I see people using 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.
>> Yeah. I thought that's why providing a 10ft trail. >> Exactly. Isn't that the whole point? >> That's what I'm talking about. >> I'm not opposed to shoulders. Have all the shoulders and emergency pulloff areas you want. Have them just get the bikes off the road. >> What if we call the shoulder and then we
decide later whether we're going to allow bikes on it? enforce them. >> Well, the state law allows bicycles to ride down the road, too. I'm just saying you're stupid if you do it, >> right? And we don't need to encourage people to do it. That's why we want to invest in these multi-use paths. It's 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.
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 10 feet trail to a bike. >> There's rails to trails. They have bikes all over.
>> They do. Yeah. I've se I've seen it before where they actually have a lane designated for bikes. >> Yeah, I have too. multi-use. >> 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 stop sign is
for the bike path and not for the street. >> No, that's fairly good. >> Neither does Google Maps. >> I mean I I guess ultimately question is you hit the nail on the head, Mr. May. If the streets are allowed to use the road anyway, I mean the bikes are allowed to use the road anyway. What do
you like? >> Wouldn't you rather have them on the outside edge to the shoulder? >> I don't want to. Well, >> I want to highly encourage them to use the multi-use path that we're now going
to obligate developers to build along vision roads. >> There are terms that we can use. 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 gavl up
there, and I'm pretty sure she's going to tell you the same thing. >> I don't I understand. And what I'm saying is I don't want an overreaction that cause 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 on economic growth. Um there is work
that's happening in the background on the rightway typicals um with county engineers. So we could look at the term more comprehensively whether we denote it on the typicals as bike lane or as shoulder or bike lane shoulder. There are other terms that are used um by like
the GIS profession as ARJS calls them edge lane roads or ELRs advisory bike lanes advisory shoulders. 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 graphic was really intended for >> and very 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 proposed
amendment here that does refer to bike lanes. So 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. It's a shoulder. >> The shoulder or whatever whatever it is that Terry may 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 is a problem because it implies that that's the purpose of it. >> Got it. >> When it's I don't think anybody thinks that should be the purpose the sole purpose of that pavement.
means you're encouraging people to use massage, >> okay? >> Which is not good. >> There was a time 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. And once we got those that changed the changed the equation. >> So, Mr. Mr. Chairman, just to clarify earlier a 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. >> Advisory shoulders. I'm okay with >> that doesn't say mics. I like when it
doesn't say bikes. >> Doesn't matter. They're shut down. >> It's true. I mean, 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 there.
>> That's why the term advisory should call it a bike lane. That's all we're saying. >> I like advisory shoulders. >> We just wanted a place for people to walk. We won't need We don't need 10 ft away. >> Exactly. >> Right. But we're talking about the five
feet. If we're talking about encouraging bicycles, we need it to be one. >> I agree on the multi-r. We're just 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 refer to a bike lane. I think >> that's the M Mr. Chair. uh after um
development review. So we 9016 already has shoulders covered as I'm sure engineers up there know. So we have a section that talks to shoulders um already. So I 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 the 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 more holistically. just stand up in this section of the code of 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 according 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. >> Sounds good to me. >> Sounds good to me.
>> You should probably make a motion. >> Yeah. So moved. Did you get that? >> Got to follow up the hierarchy here, but it's sub subsection two and three under bicycle lanes for arterial collector roads. We're just going to strike those
two subsections. >> I would second that >> motion in a second. Further discussion. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Those like sign to go home. full confidence that Terry can come up with a good name.
>> Oh yeah, >> sections. >> Absolutely. >> Shoulders carrying the weight of the world. >> Carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders. >> Got a lot riding on your shoulders. >> Thank you. >> Thanks for your time. >> Thank you. >> You thought it was going to be quick,
didn't you? That was just the second on the balance of the item. >> Oh. >> So I'll I'll move approval. >> Second. I have a motion and second. Any further discussion? All in favor?
>> I like sign. >> Okay. I hear another motion. We have enough fun for one day. Move uh to ajourn. >> Second favor. I