1.6.26 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey, feel it. a I now call back to order the Pasco County Board of Commission meeting of January 6. Please silence all electronic devices and mute your phones. We will proceed with public hearing starting with ordinances. Item number P61.

P61. We have proof of publication in the Tampa Bay Times on July 23rd, 2025, supplemented by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings for the meeting of September 3rd, 2025, where it was continued to November 12th, where it was continued to today.

Okay, Amy.

Good afternoon. Amy Tol, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Uh item P61, which is PTE26-000031, is the adoption hearing for a uh ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a smallcale comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 and sheet 8 from AGR agricultural rule to res one residential one dwelling unit per gross acre on approximately 19.69 69 acres of real property located on the north side of Blandon Road, approximately 2,150 ft east of the intersection of Blandon Road and Troy Road. This is also coming with a text amendment creating sub area policy blue 7.1.86 Blandon Road MRS. A map amendment to the future land use map 2-9 amending or adding sub area map 2-986 Blandon red MRS providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for appealer severability and effective date and this comes with your recommendation of approval we did receive opposition emails that were sent to the clerk's office we would like to have those filed received and filed as well please move

to receive and file second all in favor say I

Yes.

Okay. And then I do have a presentation for you if so desired.

All right. So, here's the proposed ordinance that was just read into record. Um, this item was actually heard on November 6th at the local planning agency. Um, at that hearing, the local planning agency denied the proposed amendment 5 to one. uh they denied it based on the proposed sub area policy and res one flu is not consistent within the northeast rural protection area and they did not want to set a precedent by creating a sub area policy that would allow for a res one flu amendment with regulations that require the area to be developed as an MRS with limited lot sizes. So again this is a comp plan amendment. It is a small-cale amendment from AGR agricultural rule to res one residential one dwelling unit per gross acre. The applicant is requesting uh the future land use amendment to allow for the development of a minor rule subdivision with lot sizes of no less than 2 and a half acres with the exception of one single parcel that has already been platted at 1.7 acres. So it cannot um be any smaller than that. There is a total of 19.69 acres. It is on the north side of Blandon Road, approximately 2,150 ft east of the intersection of Blandon Road and Troy Road. And again, there is a companion sub area policy with this helping to limit and ensure that the proposed development is consistent with the rural area. So, as you can see, the property is located in the North Market area and within rural area 1. Just some context of the area. So you have agricultural lands surrounding the area. Um there is medium density residential across the street which is a res six. That res six just for note predates the the establishment of the rural area. So it was in place before the rural area was created. Here's your transportation map. Uh as you can see it's on Blandon Road and Troy Road. There is a 12-oot multi-use path on the south side of Blandon Road. Um and it is part of the Orange Belvelt Trail. uh pending alignment just a zoomed in version of the aerial view. So uh just for note um in this area there is a range of lot sizes between84 acres uh and 23 acres in proximity to the site.

the those areas below it. Correct. Yep.

Existing future land use is AGR proposed future land use of res one. As you can see, there's agricultural in the area, RES 6 to the south, and existing res one already within rural area. Here's the sub area policy that was negotiated and agreed upon between the property owner and the county. What is happening here is even though the comprehensive plan is proposing an amendment to res one on 20 acres, the subject site is being limited to only six units. So only six lots. Um currently they can get four lots as is. Uh they're requesting to just get two more lots with this. It's approximately.3 density. So it's well under the res one density that would be permitted without the sub area policy. Additionally, there are development restrictions that um ensure the area is developed in accordance with the northeast rural scenic roadway plans as well as the northeast rule plans uh LDC section 604. Uh with the sub area policy, the applicant also provided a conceptual plan. As you can see, most of these lots are above 2.5 acres. Uh the lowest lot is going to be the 1.7 acre, which is the exemption, but the second lowest lot is 2.3 acres with the remaining lots being above 3 acres. The proposed amendments consistent with the following comprehensive plan policies. And with that, we would like to accept public comment and adopt the proposed amendment by roll call vote.

Okay.

Uh the applicant is also here, I'm sorry, with the presentation if necessary.

All right. Any questions for staff?

No.

Okay. Let's hear from the applicant.

Hey, good afternoon, commission. Uh appreciate your time today. Hope you all had a very merry Christmas. Um

and you didn't name the company with

Yeah, Jarus Barbie. um symbiosis planning consulting. I'm an AICP certified planner. Um so I'm just going to run through some of the slides here and then I'd be happy to take and answer any questions uh as they arise. So, as as Amy had mentioned, we're requesting this land use amendment from the AGR to res one and having the sub area policy in place to restrict um the development rights even further than what a minor rural subdivision would be. Um in in any other location, the minor rural subdivision would allow up to 10 10 units to be developed underneath a minor rural subdivision. So, we have proposed to further limit that and propose the 2 and 1/2 acre uh minimum. Um the smallest lot as shown on the concept plan, which I'll put back up here, it was 2.53 acres. And uh the storm water tract that is shown on the on the concept plan was put in a separate tract, but it it may be able to be done via easements. So, those lots might even be larger than the 2.5 acres. It was just shown to be the the maximum uh development restriction.

What I'm sorry, what do you mean by easement?

It within a minor rural subdivision uh storm water uh may be done in easements rather than specific separate tracks.

Does anyone else understand? Yeah,

they all do.

You mean on each lot they would?

But Mr. County attorney

these lots are large enough that you wouldn't have separate storm water systems. Correct.

I'm kind of

correct. It

so that so it it is just shown for the absolute worst case scenario if any additional water quality and and treatment may be required. Uh along with that

I I don't think those are necessary in a minor does not require storm water.

Well, is that right? That's why I'm confused.

There there would be a road that would be going in there and it it was intended to capture any storm water runoff that may be collected off of the paved roadway.

But are you required to have that?

Can anyone Does anyone in my staff

Sorry.

Why don't Why don't we go through the presentation? We'll get to that.

Okay.

Okay. You can just say yes sir.

Come forward if you want.

I thought it could just work.

Uh Patrick Dutter, development director. It depends on the engineering that goes behind it. Most minor rural subdivisions don't require any kind of engineering or infrastructure um or storm water ponds, but it just depending on the scope and may they may require storm water ponds. It's probably unlikely with this site. And I think that's what Jerus is trying to say.

Correct. And I am not an engineer for for the record. It um I've just drawn up a conceptual plan thinking of worst case scenarios. Um so here you can see the the plan again. Um the lots range from 2.53 acres to 3.43 acres. We've in shown the scenic roadway buffers and each um of the lots would also have to have some other buffering that would be accompanying that. So, um, within the northeast rural area, they require a type A buffer between buildings and any roadways and type B buffer between buildings and adjacent properties in in addition to the the external property buffering. Um,

we proposed amendment. I'm not sure why you're getting this detail.

Understood. Um and then we're we would plan to have just one single access um to the project. Um this is again just showing that the minor rules subdivision would typically allow up to 10 lots and we're proposing six with this plan.

Um Mr. Sty

trying to understand your drawing. So um I don't think you're need that pond but um what is What are the lines here? Is that the road that's in the dark frames?

Correct. Yes, ma'am.

And what's the other line?

The other lines would be setbacks.

Why?

Wow. I don't know. Maybe I'm not well verssed on minor subdivisions. I don't know.

Okay. But that but the the total acreage does not include or does include

sub the the acreage would include all the way to the to the center of of the roadway. Um the roadway is in an easement in minor rural subdivisions.

I've never seen that we buffered residential to residential. So you don't have buffering within the subdivision.

Well, it there are specific buffering regulations called out within the northeast rural land development or in the in the rural area land development code. Um I think there are along the front of the pro along the front but not I'm sorry. Go ahead.

Go ahead.

Um and the method of utilities would be uh well and septic in compliance with with these two policies that were noted. and we we demonstrated consistency with with several several references from the comprehensive plan. And I I just wanted to end with with a statement um that that shows uh the goal of the protection of rural areas in the comp plan. It establishes Pasco County's framework for preserving the rural lifestyle, agricultural viability, environ environmental resources, and low inensity development pattern within north northeast Pasco rural area. Um, this goal emphasizing managing growth in a manner that protects rural character for existing residents and and remains available to future residents. Um here

I I would propose that this proposal meets the intent of gold flu 2 protection of rural areas by si significantly limiting the density uh below the res one category maintaining rural lot size avoiding urban infrastructure expansion and preserving compatibility with surrounding agricultural and residential uses. This six lot configuration represents a conservative, contextsensitive rural subdivision that aligns with Pasco County's adopted comprehensive plan and long-term vision for the northeast Pasco rural area.

Let me ask you a question. Um the 1.7 acre parcel that's platted, does that mean that was done before the comprehensive plan?

Yes, sir. Correct. And and the reason why it was treated separately in within this uh proposal in in the um sub area policy is because for us to include it, we would have to come to you all to ask for a rideway vacation for it to be combined in into one larger project, which I believe uh my landowner, the landowner for this project does intend to file for that, but he wanted to go ahead and and file this application um to come before you and not try to pigeon hole that that that had to be done without you know you guys having the opportunity to decide upon that. And if you take out that 1.7 acres that's already approved for the density that it's got. The others would be that then if you take the average out add the 1 point uh three acres to the smaller site. Every site's well over three acres.

Correct. Yes sir.

I think that's I mean I'd be phrasing it that way. Now rural subdivision if you follow different rules you can get to 10 by that be take more

that is just the maximum amount of lots that are allowed within the residential one category while developing a minor rural subdivision

okay but currently you don't have the rights to get 10 acres I mean 10 units

not unless we were proposing it without a sub area policy um which we have profered up that to further limit it below the 10 units that would be allowed if it were adopted without any sub area policy. But but

his density is going to be limited by his zoning, not not necessarily by the maximum under minor rural subdivision. But I'm not sure why we're having this inepth conversation about minor rural subdivision. It's you're putting a new future land use classific use classification res one

and then whatever the zoning is currently on the property unless they are coming in for reszoning would be your limiting factor.

Yeah. So I mean it is extra detail we normally wouldn't get to but I'm just trying to make sure I understand the 1.7 acres with my primary unders.

Any other questions? Okay. Uh, does staff want to comment anything? No. Okay. All right. So, now's the time to go to public comment sheet.

Yes, we do. Uh, Nancy Hazelwood.

And how many people on the list do?

Um, about right now one four plus one online.

Good afternoon. Nancy Hayeswood 34110. a nice place, state city, Florida. Uh, I don't know how we got here. I can't believe that you're saying you're going to protect the rural area by putting res one right in the middle. What about the next guy that is res one? Because I didn't see one.

This is You're changing the comprehensive plan to res one if this goes through.

Okay. But there three.

Can we have an open discussion, please? I lost 5 seconds.

I'm kidding.

Anyway, so res one right in the middle of Northeast. Res one should be used sparingly and if at all at the edges of Northeast Royal, not smack dab in the middle where the next person can come along and say, "Hey, look, I should get this, too." So, hey, you turn down the next person. Um, this is not gonna this it's not going to ensure any type of compatibility with northeast rural and the only thing around it that is not agg is an old HUD development that was grandfathered in. Everything else around them is a and the other thing is the minor rural subdivision is coming up on the tree ordinance and it's going to be exempt from trees. So they can clear cut every tree in there. I understand they're putting a buffer on the outside, but that doesn't mean that we need every single tree cut inside. This is the northeast rural and rural usually means trees. The planning board and the sick turned the project down and they said is not consistent with northeast protected area. They did not want to set a precedent by creating a sub area policy that would require res one FLU amendment with regulations that require the or to be developed with an MRS and limit the size of lots. So I suggest that we uh go with what planning board said. I just don't trust what this could create right in the middle. Let's think about what we're doing with our growth again. Thank y'all. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Julia Bartunic.

Julia Bartinic, 2645 Meadowwood Drive, New Perichi, Florida 34655. And I concur with everything that Nancy Hazelwood stated. And uh this change will definitely uh be an unfortunate it will establish an unfortunate precedent for the rural area of Pasco County and and it will encourage uh developments to follow suit. Thank you,

Kathleen uh Snider. Do I need to be sworn in?

No.

No. Okay. Um, Kathleen Schneider, 34553 Blandon Road. I took a little bit of time last night and I'll show you what I've got. I went from James Road to the college on Bllandon Road and I wrote down every parcel that was this size or larger. This size there were there are 30 and and I am not going way out. I'm being conservative. This is direct access to Blandon Road. There are 33 parcels. Guess how many acres there are. 1,155.66. And that's being conservative. It's not even including this property. This, if you say yes to them, every single one of these property owners are going to say, "You did it for them. You can do it for us." And what are we going to be left with out here? a big major mess. I'm concerned what you're going to do. You've got a chance to stand firm with us and say, "No, this does not does not belong in this area. This gentleman bought this property knowing how it was zoned. Now he wants to come along and change everything. We lived here for years and years and years and this is not what we need in our area. Mr. Oakley, you know it. Mr. Witman, you know it. Jack, you know it. Mr. Stein Schneider, you know it. Katherine Starky, you know it. And Lisa, you know it, too. And it's about time that you stood up for the people that live out here and say no to this stuff. It's enough already. Thank you,

Cindy Gandalfi. 34953 Blandon Road, Date City. Uh, tough act to follow. Um, we have lived out here over 20 years and we've all bought the property knowing that we would not have to worry about subdivisions coming in because of the already created zoning in our area. Uh, this is the ordinance ordinance that will kill northeast Pasco rural area. One acre is not considered rural. This development doesn't fit in in here. Um it's hard enough to keep up with all the large buildings, subdivisions going in, let alone some small land owners. Uh he knew again by what he was buying for and he wants to change it. Uh we have no guarantee. He's still looking for res. We have no guarantee further down the road. He's already changed his mind several times. This is I don't know how many meetings we've been to with this gentleman. Um he uh the planning commissioners recommended denial. Um we hope and pray that you will do the same thing and one of the commissioners actually said that they did not want to stop this domino effect and once you start it's going to be hard to say no. Thank you

Paul Gandalf. Good afternoon. Name's Paul Gandalfi. 34953 Blandon Road. Uh 34953, excuse me, 33523. Um I'm obviously opposed to this. I don't see the reason for resum. They're asking for two and a half acre lots covered perfectly by res 2. So I'm suspicious about the reason they're going for res one. I've raised this uh argument twice before. They have not answered it. I've suggested there's a developer waiting at the wings or they're looking for a quick way to sell this and make a profit for you know more money because of the increased concentration. So, I'm asking to reject this, please. Um, there's a 24 acre lot between our property and the subject property. We're about 1,000 ft north of his. And if this property goes to res one, because the owner of the 24 acres has told me that he plans to sell sometime in the future, the chances are this will go the same way. So, we'll have a bunch of houses on our southern property line, forcing us to move and give up our plans for our retirement there. So, please consider your residence on Bllandon Road. It's important to us. We do not want the concentration of buildings and traffic in our neighborhood. Thank you very much.

That's all that have signed pre-signed for this item.

Okay. So, I know there's a few other people that didn't get to sign up on time. So if anybody wants to speak to this item, if you would please come line up one by one and we'll we'll give everyone a chance to speak for three minutes. So no one else wants to speak other than this one gentleman. If you do, please line up. All right. So please line up behind him and your name address, sir, for the record.

Uh good afternoon. Uh my name is James Naro Senior and I live at 34721 Blandon Road, Day City, Florida. Uh my input, I mean all of it that's been said, we've been here uh this is the third time and I guess it counts with you guys. Um my input is I live right next door to this subdivision and right now the water is terrible. I've had to have color good system. I have four tanks and we still getting uh rust. Add more to that particular property. It is crazy. Plus, right now it is a dangerous road. You're adding more entrances. Please, please consider um rejecting this proposal. Thank you. Who's the class?

Your name and address for the record, please.

Maggie West, 34949 Lanton Road, Date City, Florida. And kind of going over what everybody else said. Also, I live right behind this property. My entrance to my property, which I own the road, that road right next to it is my road. So, as I pull out of Blankton every day, it already takes since all the development going on. It took me 20 minutes to get out of my property the other day because all this traffic in our area. I thought we were rural protection area. I thought we didn't have to worry about that. But they're talking about putting a driveway on that hill. And if any of you are familiar and know who Mr. Oakley is, that hill, it's going to get somebody killed. It's it's just there's no way to put a driveway really in that area. Um, we've moved here several years ago to retire also. uh Mr. Gandalfie and other folks in this area and we were under assumption when we bought in the area several years ago that we didn't have to worry about it because of rural protection and five acre minimums and now they're talking about this guy just bought this property a couple years ago and he wants to change everything. It's not fair to us people that have been paying and living in this area for many years to just change zoning because I'll tell you heads up right now like Mr. Gandalfi said the property behind him is 35 acres. He's going to sell that soon. So, what you've done is you set a precedence. If you let these folks build, then he's going to open up his because he's waiting to hear what's going on here. He's already made that comment and he said if you open it up, they're more than likely going to open his 30 something acres. So, now we're looking at 50 acres of homes that we don't want to see. And it's just we just beg you guys to please abide by the rural protection zone and keep us the way we are. We love Day City, but if this happens, you're going to get nothing but homes. And all of us folks that bought all this property out this way years ago are going to sell it, and then you're going to get more property because I don't want to live here. You guys, you know, I mean, I honor and respect every one of you. I worked my whole life in government, but this isn't the place for me and my family anymore. We all got grown kids, but I I don't want to deed on my property because they don't want to live in traffic either. So, we just beg you guys to listen to us. you know, taxpayers and people that love this area. I'm sure everybody in here loves Dade City. That's why we moved here. But if it goes up like this, you're going to see a lot of homes for sale because we can't live in this. Thank you for your time and I hope you guys please listen to everybody that's speaking. You know, not for the money, but people that love this area and continue to love it. Thank you again. All right. So, I don't see anyone else. So, we're going to close public comment. Is there anyone online?

Not for this item.

Okay. Uh back to the staff want to comment maybe on the res one, res two.

Yes, you read my mind. Uh Amy Tol, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. So, there's three points that I would like to just have some clarity on. First is the one dwelling unit per gross acre. Yes, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment is changing to res one flu. The sub area policy is limit limiting it to six units. Six units only. So when the zoning comes in, they cannot get any more than the six units. If they wanted to get more than the six units, they would have to come back in through the hearing process and do a text amendment to change it, which is also three public hearings. It's treated as the large scale. So that one would go to the state if they needed to come in and ask for more units or more density, excuse me. Res two, uh, currently our future land use, uh, for rural areas is AG, AGR, and RESZ 1. We do not have a res 2 flu. The next flu would be a res 3. So the opportunity to cap it at a two would be the same tool or using the same tool currently as a sub area policy to go to a res three and then cap it as a res 2. Um in this scenario we're doing a res one capping it at six units which is.3 dwelling units per gross acre. So it's a third of an acre. Lastly uh there was a comment that stated the northeast rule is a minimum of five acre lots. That is not an accurate statement. There's various areas within the northeast rule that's a res one. Our current comprehensive plan classifies res one as a rural land use classification in the comprehensive plan. So those are my my topics.

Mr. Chairman, one more one more thing if you would clarify. Amy, so there's been all this talk about what a minor rural subdivision allows in res one. The current zoning for this property is AC,

correct? So, it's minimum 10 acre lots unless they come back for a reasoning.

Correct. They would have to come back for a reasonzoning. Um, however, the sub area policy would limit it to 2.5 acres and six units. So, when they come in for reszoning to do the MRS, they would be limited to those provisions in the sub area policy.

Sure. Um, Mr. W.

You want me to ask my question?

All right. if they tell me why they wouldn't just have gone to the minor rural subdivision instead of going this way.

Um, so in their current AGR form, the minor rule subdivision wouldn't allow them to get the 2 and 1/2 acres. Um, so this was the next option. So the res one with the minor rule subdivision and the cap.

If you take out the one point if you take out the 1.7 acres, it comes to an average of four acres lot. They couldn't get four acres out in the minor rural. Um, right now it's 1.1 to5. Currently, the current future land use is a minimum of 5 acres. Um, if they ended up doing the minor rule subdivision, there were provisions that wouldn't get I mean they could they could do less through the minor rural subdivision, but

Mr. Chairman, as I've as I've tried to indicate, I think the minor rural subdivision question for this is a lost leader. The future land use classification for this property is AGR, which is

one to five.

One to five.

Correct.

So they can't they can't if they do a minor rural subdivision, it's 5 acre lots.

Correct.

As they current as they currently sit.

Except they're in AC, which means it's 10 acre lots.

Correct.

So

nothing better.

So

Okay. So that argument was not valid.

Yeah. Unfortunately, the tools that we have in our toolbox being the comprehensive plan and the land development code don't really give us the options to to do 2 and a half acre lot subdivisions like this. So, these are the tools that we have in our toolbox to allow for them to do smaller lots but still maintain the rural character.

Okay, Commissioner W.

Thank you, Chair. So, we saw this and watch the planning commission. Ordinarily, I I think we'd all be like, "Yeah, this is a a really nice project to see in our county because we don't huge fan of minor rule subdivisions. The the precedent setting tone to this, say this goes through and we have it set 2 and a half acres. So that means future property owners come in and it opens it opens the opportunity for them to come in and then do exactly the same same process because precedent's been set. I I guess when you look down the road, we Oh, no. I I'm concerned with the precedent setting nature of this the project. Like I said, it's a nice project. Ordinarily, it' be great to see in our county. I guess the what I'm asking is should we be taking a look at the properties within that one to five range to have a mechanism that allows this scenario to happen.

That way it's not a oneoff and it's clearly defined and property owners know what they have and uh what they may or may not be able to do with their property in the future. that am I making sense?

Yeah, absolutely. So, um a couple couple comments for that. Um with respect to setting the president, they're always going to they can any any applicant can apply for comprehensive plan amendment doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be approved. It'll have to go through the board's review and the board's discretion to accept it or or not. Um, so, so yes, in this scenario, you could approve it, but something could change next week and no longer be applicable. Um,

so follow up to that,

thank you,

chair.

Based on what the county attorney said where it's one to five and this is kind of going taking a different road, different path to get here. What is this?

What what was the mechanism for staff then to bring this forward

the way that it is policy?

Right. So the subary policy allows you all the flexibility

to control it outside of the scope of our standard process. Yeah.

At least through the comprehensive plan. Um additionally just for the board's understanding as you all are very much aware we're going through the 2050 change. Um, and within our Pasco 2050, uh, we are not allowing or the proposal once it goes through the review, it's got to go through the state and get approved. But our current trajectory is to not allow any additional res flu after 2050 is adopted.

So when are we voting on that?

Spring

of this year.

Correct.

Right now it's 25 horizon.

So it's right around the corner and this one could potentially skirt in correct before that change. All right. Thank you, Commissioner Ro.

Okay. Amy, correct me if you will. Back uh I'm going to say about a year ago, the property just on Blandon Road just to the south and to the and the west side of the road or on the right side if you're going back toward Dade City. There was a property in there with the Filman family.

Okay. and they zoned that 2 and 1/2 acre lots and it was approved by the plan commission and the board came through. It is 2 and 12 acre lots which is not very far from where this is probably a couple miles or so south of where this property is. And what confuses me is the rule group with Nancy Hazywood and and some of her folks were all in favor and and agreeable to that being 2 and a half acre lots. So I don't know what changed from that being okay at 2 and 1/2acre lots to this not being okay. And this is a good project. When they first came to me about it, I looked at it, but they wanted 10 lots and I thought that was too small for the rural area. But 2 and 1/2 acre lots, I mean, a 1 acre lot is 210 by 210. A very big nice lot. You've got two and a half times that on these properties, which make them a very nice lot. So, and they have trees on there. Nobody's going to go on that land where they're going to build a house. If there's a tree in the way of where they need to put their house, I'm sure they're going to talk about take getting a permit, take that out. But most of the trees I think they'll they'll want to keep in this neighborhood. But it's it it's designed out. But I'm kind of confused where the real group is cuz one minute they want it and it's okay and the next minute they don't want anything. But the fact of it is 2 and 1/2 acre and larger lots keeps the density down from from getting expanded to one acre lot. So

Sure.

Yeah. I think the confusion that's occurring is with the the res one flu. And so at face value, yes, the color on the map is res one,

but it's not your standard just flat res one approval, meaning you have 20 acres go into res one, you can have 20 lots. That's not what's happening here. We are allowing or we are proposing to amend the flu to res one only because we don't have any other option to achieve that middle ground. And so that's where now we've added an additional regulatory document being the sub area policy. Any zoning that occurs is required to be consistent with the comprehensive plan of that time. So by adopting this with a sub area policy, if they wanted to change it and increase their density, they will have to come back in for a text amendment, which is like this is a small scale, so we only went two uh public hearings. It's administratively or courtesy sent to the state. A text amendment changing that is actually going through a transmitt review. State has their review, provides their comments. It's a threemonth versus a two public hearing. It's a much more extensive process to make that change. So, from our tools that we have and from the county's perspective, by establishing or or adding a sub area policy, they're only asking for two additional lots. It's restricted to 2 and 1/2 acres. So, they will not be able to get 1 acre lots here and any a change to that will have to come through the public hearing review again.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I attorney, if I may, um,

it appears based on the maps that you've been provided that east of Adelia Street, maybe pronouncing that wrong, um, has been zoned ER2. So that's what I think the commissioner was referring to when it was, you said it was 2 and a half acres,

right? all of that property um shown on the map to the that sort of goes on the west side of Blandon after you get to Adelia is ER2. Everything to the west of Adelia um is sort of a hodgepodge of zoning categories, but it is all um AGR or AG.

So to answer you back on on the property I was talking about, it's right there next to the uh solar farm. It's actually just to the north in Plat Road

and the that's where that property got zoned to it's a hayfield right now because they have not sold any lots but they're 2 and a half acre lots is what they are.

What can you be more specific because I'm on my maps. What what intersection? Bllandon and what

road

Plat Road and

it's called on Google maps it's called mountain view

I think. What do you

Mountain View solar farm? Wow.

Plat.

Yeah. Plat room.

Can we see where that is since someone put that up?

Plat road.

And that's that came force probably a year year and a half ago,

which I was surprised that they they were for that. I I didn't pick up on that. Most of that's 5 acre lots or bigger.

I see Mr. Blommo's house. 2.71 acres.

Yeah.

For the southwest on 2.64. Just turn 2.64. And I think Filman family still owns that land.

2.91.

Amy, while we're waiting, so I'm looking at the land users and

where that development is, right below it is all res six,

correct?

And then below it's res one. Why would it be that way? Why would they go the other way?

Um, those were grandfathered in. So, there was a future land use change for the res 6 that occurred prior to 2006.

Okay.

Uh, the rural area created was created in 2006ish around that time frame. Um, so that future land use predates the rural area.

That that property you're talking about there, that that project was done 30 or 40 years ago.

I don't know why they did it, but that's that's when that It's kind of interesting though. Um,

Bangum realy actually.

So, while record,

are we waiting to see any more up there?

Yeah.

Waiting for the road.

So, um, a question. May I ask?

Yeah. Before we go, are we are we waiting to see what Plat Road is or is it shown?

Is it shown? Plat Road. What? Where are we going?

You did say in the spring we're like we're going to be moving towards this if we when we vote on the new comp plan amendment.

Correct.

Yeah. So um uh so actually I may retract that when you say moving towards this.

So meaning like this would just get this if this goes through it would be done right before we approve the new

contract. Correct. So this would be essential.

But you're not going in that direction.

I know that direction. I understand.

I know the opposite.

Correct.

So, Commissioner Stark.

Well, okay. Then now I have two questions.

Originally, the applicant came into your office and they were looking for 10 acres. I mean 10.

No, they they actually had started out wanting 10. They were talking about family units and their family was big or they wanted 10 units, but I I didn't I didn't agree to that and didn't want to agree to that and I was more set on two and a half acre lots cuz it's bigger and nicer lots and I thought that was better for the rural area.

But these are um these potentially are four acre lots.

They're a minimum of two. They cannot be smaller than two acre lots. So, however divide, they could have it bigger.

Wait, if they if they don't have to do the pond, it could be four acre lots.

Correct. Correct.

Um,

they all do a pond,

right?

They won't need

They won't have to do that.

They won't need a pond.

Yeah. So, they're Can you put up your numbers again? Um, but my my other question while they're putting those up, you put those up. Did you say so the issue here and the and the fear for everyone and I understand it is res one

it's the color on the map correct

but you say right now res one is allowed I mean I know res one as sprawl

correct yeah so res one um pursuant to section flu a6 resz one is defined as a rural land use classification

yeah and I I don't I mean I don't want to see one acre out here but I don't I don't object to

they're not going to be they're going to be two and a half acres better

they're only going to be four acres That's what I

Okay, but I'm saying I kind of see those

they're bigger lots. There's folks out there right now that have been planting that are on four acres rather than five.

Nice nice big piece of property.

I've been pulling up the um property appraisers map and looking at all the land around. Actually, there's a lot of homes on Bllandon that are two acres.

Yeah.

A lot.

But that's from years and years ago that people moved there and they only had certain amount of acreage and were able to do that back then. Yeah. Um, okay. So, let's look here. So, if you got rid of 1.3 acres of storm water, and I don't understand what what's going on with that corn that parcel in the in the front.

Mr. Chairman,

I would I would highly advise you not to use this document for anything.

It's conceptual.

You just use the staff has provided you with a sub area policy. That is what you're limiting. And if the sub area policy can be put up for the commissioner, that's what which was part of the the PowerPoint. Um, that's what you're limiting. There it is. That's what you're limiting that if you make this decision, that's what the res one will be limited to.

Okay. So set the of I I'm still trying to understand that piece in the front because when I did the math

1.78 acres is that piece in the front.

Correct.

The piece in the back is 17.96. I got the stuff the property that comes out to 19.74 acres.

Correct.

So if you divide that by six, you're getting Yeah. over three.

Well, you got to do the road, too.

But they would own the road to the middle. minor rural. If it's minor rural, it's accessed by

Okay. So, and that must be with that gentleman kind of thing. So, basically, it's 20 acres.

It is a 20 acre. The flu change is approximately 20 acres. So, six so six lots of there is over three acres per

and um for for math purposes uh the 17 acre lot would be five units because the 1.7 acre would be part of those six and the 1.7 acre is controlled because it's platted. So, it can't be it's basically an exemption to the 2.5 minimum. So out of the 17 acres, you're going to have two and a half minimum lots and you can only have five

and then they get one on the 1.7.

Correct.

Now I wish this comment for county attorney. You know, in my short three years doing this, I've never really heard apprehension in your statements. You seem your tone's different on this one. You seem a bit apprehensive in decision that we're going to need to be make. Is there some kind of legal precedent?

Cuz I can't count three votes.

Underline.

I don't know. It's just normally this is different. What do you want about convo? Let's go.

So, I'm trying I'm trying to stay

I've not done this before.

I I try and do it every meeting,

but but usually usually I usually I know where the board wants to go and I can I can sort of guide you that it's okay or it's not okay. In this case, I'm trying to remain neutral and I think this is a legislative act of the board of county commissioners. You can vote it up or vote it down. And legally, I think you can we can defend your actions. That that what I was trying to point out earlier is you can you can take the presidential view that north of BL north of Blandon is AGR and it should stay AGR. You can also zoom out and say, well, a little bit further east, you're at two and a half dwelling units an acre. So, did I'm just trying to

I'm not saying you're doing good or bad.

Okay, just picked up on something. I'm going to have fun with you at least once a Tuesday. A month. I I just have one comment.

So, if if we're going to be moving away from this, and I don't know about you guys, but currently we've received 33 emails plus public comment. Like the the public the people around it, they don't they don't want it resoned, right?

Please do not please.

But I'm I understand that. But what I'm saying is to set the precedence for other land owners. And if we're moving away, like if if when we redo the uh comp plan amendment, this won't be allowed.

Um

so I'm just I I guess my question is then why would we

why would we do it now?

Is that a correct statement?

Um we are proposing to restrict any new res ones within the northeast rural area.

Okay. But

please please I'm not going to ask you again, but please do not. We're in front of a discuss one. And I understand that the only reason you're using you're using res one here is because you have no other tool.

Will we not allow any 3 acre lots going forward?

Nothing under five.

Great question.

Well, that's

we will have to explore that.

I cannot base my vote on how many people show up to take a voice on one way or the other. I have to base my vote on facts and and law and those things. So that that's that's where I am.

So um

I'm just trying to base my vote where we're heading as a county.

Well, I just one at a time. Excuse me. One at a time, please.

So the res one really is irrelevant here because it it it's not going to be used as res one, which I'm 100% against oneacre lots.

Correct.

Uh I want to

unless it's in a conservation subdivision,

right? And we did offer that as an option when this first came in, but they didn't qualify for a conservation subdivision.

So, I will say in looking at this one here, I didn't think it was a huge issue. I was surprised with all the emails that were coming in, etc. Looking at it, I looked at it closer, I go, I don't have a heartache with it for what we're going to get to what it was. But listening to the people, I understand their their fear of the president's going to set. But what you just said actually gave me a little more comfort because if we're going to put this in our new comp plan that a res one is not going to be allowed in the area. This is going to be a one and done anyway and we're and it's it can't happen again anyway. So it's it's it's going to limit

it's not a lot of density. And to me, I I think the way we should do this is that 1.7 acres should be separate from all the other calculations and equally divided with with the the square the acreage between the other four units. Doesn't have to be precise, but right

they should be at least over three.

Is it five or six?

The sub area policy is six, but that also that includes the 1.7 acre parcel.

Yeah. So it's one plus that one stays at one it'll be 1.7 and then the 17 whatever gets divided into five.

Correct. And the applicant has also proposed that they are willing or they're they've coordinated with real property to vacate the roadway that's in the middle of it that bisects it. So the roadway would be absorbed. We've also already received confirmation from real property that you know when they apply for that they bring it with a level of support. Um, so they would vacate that rightway that would be absorbed into the abuing property and that would actually bring the 1.7 closer to two. And what was the gentleman referring to about I understand the buffering out of land if that you know when we did the scenic overlay there was you can't take away the long views. It's very important to

is that what he's referring to because he doesn't have to buffer in between the lots, right?

Um,

no. No,

it's just that right the scenic corridor is the the visual landscaping and buffering along Bon.

It it it does look like a beautiful heavily wooded lot. So, you know, you know how I feel about trees, but I don't know how we can regulate what percentage of their lots they can clear because frankly, you can be agg and you can be you can clear the whole thing and you can have pigs or whatever. Um

we do have a proposed sub area currently under review. So

real quick

when you look at this in the 3 acre 2 and 1 half 3 acre or 4 acre lots are very nice lots. There's a lot of people that don't want to be in dense properties. These folks especially they don't want to be any more dense than that would be. But there's a lot of people that are out there wanting large lots to build their home on and have some piece of the land to take care of. Uh not everybody's set for taking care of two and a half, three, four acre lots cuz it takes a little more work to take care of that than it does a yard and where you got to high density. But there's a lot of people and that will keep the rural area rural by having these larger lots. Okay. And question M commission you may know our staff but as far as there was a danger as far as someone was worried about the connection to the to Blint Road. Is there any concern about that? My road I'm right be my road's Macan that I go into Timber Hill Drive where I live and I'm right before right the the road right before you get to the interstate going to the west.

Uh we've had a couple accidents lately at Trilby where Trilby connects to Blandon has been dangerous here lately for for some reason or other. I don't know why. cars overturned right there and and some other accidents happen and uh but everybody's being very careful about how they drive out there on that road and I to the point that I've actually um gone further with the fire department out at Blandon. They don't have your normal signal lights and all stopping traffic. And some of my neighbors out there mentioned to me one day that that the fire engines were trying to come out to go either to the interstate or to an accident and they couldn't hardly get out because at that certain time they had a lot of cars on Blandon right in that area. So I've asked if we could get some kind of flashing lights or something of that nature in front of that fire station so when they do come out those lights go on and make it safer for the public out there along with our emergency teams going out. So

let me ask this for for safety. Do you think it would work if we had I mean first first of all to protect the tea canopy a tree canopy along Glant Road so it yeah stays natural,

right?

But I would also think that at the entryway and then maybe a light before a light light after that we have this acreage share in the cost to put like three street lights one at and two before and after to kind of give it a little bit light for nighttime.

But you mean on Blat Road?

On Blat Road. I don't know. That's somebody else with the administration. Maybe there's a reser. I mean, it probably uh I know it would lighten it up. I mean, sometimes it's dark out that way cuz you're out in the country, but most people don't want lights.

I was I was I can't get that I can't get that information. That's what I'm asking you.

Oh, yeah. That's But I u I think some lights were okay, but there's quite a few homes right along that same area. I don't think they'd want light shining in their windows all the time. I wouldn't want to do that.

So, I'll share my thoughts as far as from what I see. I'm comfortable with the acreage. I'm not comfortable if that we don't have knowing that we got a clear precedent not to allow this to keep on going. If you're telling me this spring we're going to have something coming in for resone's not going to be even allowed, so this won't be able to happen again.

I I personally would be fighting not not to get any denser than that. So, and I think that's the biggest fear that everybody's got is that.

Oh, I understand.

Going forward. So, if we can protect if we can protect the people from that and we know from staff that resone's not going to be allowed in this rural area any longer and that won't happen with for anything the neighbor next door, anybody else coming in from here on through. I've got I've got comfort with it.

Right. I think that's right.

Commission Whitman Amy. So, four homes could go currently.

Currently,

we're looking at adding two more.

Correct.

Oh. Yes. So,

six total.

Correct.

It's six total.

And that includes the 1.7 acres.

Including. So, six

total.

Total. Including the 1.7.

Correct.

Not seven. It's six.

So, stop it. Stop it right now.

Six max. what it is.

Andy, you got you got 17.96 acres

and you got a zoning category that allows 10.

Oh, correct.

So, that would be

So, they would need to reszone to achieve the four.

So, they still need they need a reszone to get to four.

Correct.

So, from two to six,

where are we at? motion.

Well, I I you know, I'm with you, Commissioner Oakley. Um and and you I would never allow res one. Um

that res one would just cost the county a lot of money in services and sprawl. It's not good. This is not res one. I mean,

this is not a place for res.

It's not It's not red. It's not res one.

No. Um, I'm looking at um I just texted my husband, you know, we did a subdivision that is tucked into some of our property uh called Arista where I where I live and we have we do have half acre, one acre and larger lots and we we allow horses in there. If you have an acre, you can have a horse.

Yeah.

Um but um two two to three acres that that's fine for me. That's That's a large

on this road here considering the conditions around it. Never never one.

I move approval.

Yeah, I'll second.

You're moving approval of staff's recommendation.

Yes.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Any further discussion?

Can I give a second?

Roll call. You got a second. Commission start.

Okay. Roll call vote.

District one. Commissioner Oakley.

I. District two, Commissioner Waggum.

Nay.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner Joerger.

Nay.

District five, Chairman Mariano.

I'm going to go I knowing that the residents are going to be protected.

Yeah.

Motion passes 32.

Next.

Item P62. P62. We have proof of publication in the December 17th, 2025 edition of the Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site posters. All right. Item P62, PDE26-0135, is an ordinance amending the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 and sheet 14, changing from Comm to PD plan development on approximately 32.51 acres of real property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Old Pasco Road and Overpass Road and a text amendment. to sub area policy flu 7.1.60 6 Adrian Phillip and an amendment to the future land use map 2-9 amending sub area map 2-960 Adrien Phillip uh providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repealer severability and an effective date um this item comes before you um as the adoption hearing for this comprehensive plan amendment and PTE comes forward with uh a recommendation to adopt the proposed amendment by roll call vote This also has a companion uh to companion zoning item P67.

Okay, any questions for staff? I'm going to fire a few questions. Um the way we had built this uh hat to change, we spent $65 million and we were pushing hard to have jobs created. Was the way this set up? We didn't have any residential in the zoning.

That is correct. It was actually in the comprehensive plan. So, this is a similar scenario that was just approved. It was calm flu with a sub area policy that restricted it um to only commercial restricted uh residential. So, no residential and it also had provisions to align with the northeast rule or the transition area I believe, but that was removed uh earlier this year. So we remove those as well.

Okay. So again to trying to create jobs and you've heard me say matter of fact we just had a gentleman in here we just gave a big economic development to Lane Mendelson and Lane had a place on Old Pasco Road by the fire station. Uh it's a giant sized place when CO hit,

right?

People didn't want to work from didn't want to come back to work. He sold the place bought a place all the way down to State Road 56 because he couldn't find anything he could buy and own.

Right

now I will tell you that he's down there now. talked to him today about it and uh he's trying to expand this business from there in the whole complex he's in. He can't buy a place. He can't rent the place. Now, you've heard me talk to this item before as it's come before and I've always said that there's a market out there for office that's unmet and hasn't been met. And in talking to Mr. Hobby who we hear from um many times I've said there is a market there. I had him contact with Lane directly. And I will tell you, I went a little bit further today. Uh, and I drove down when I drove in today. I drove down Overpass Road. Went down across uh down Old Pass Old Pasco Road down Overpass Road up 75. And actually videoed it. Matter of fact, if you would maybe you can even share the pictures uh while I'm talking um to get a good firm handle as far as what I see when I go down there. So, as I look at it, um, you've got prime space at an intersection that we spent a lot of money on, and I don't think we did it to just create more apartments. Um, I know right down below, we took that sprayfield area, made the industrial park there. We thought it was like 24 acres. I I did initially at 24 acres. We got a 90 99 acre industrial park. We now have uh John Hopkins Hospital going across the street.

Yeah. Now I think everywhere you look at every single hospital coming in what happens doctor's offices are everywhere.

Oh right around.

So we are creating demand what we have across the street to have all these doctor's offices other things coming in that are going to be high income jobs that we wanted to see when we spent all this money interchange. not to just get more residential, which is frankly clogging up our streets and it's going to be worse when all these other old Pasco apartments go online, but to go put more apartments out here. I think it just goes completely against what was planned for the intersection all the way through. Um, and I even talked to another gentleman today wasn't really looking in this particular area, but he's been looking for space, office space. He can't find any cuz he wants to buy it and own it as well. Can't find anything. Um, so with that said, I know this development is first going to live local, which drew a lot of attention for a lot of things, but we've been pushed back and pushed back real hard on this, and I know staff has been pushed hard on it, too, to drive this thing through, but I'm just telling you, this is such a prime piece of property that again, we set it up to be commercial for a reason. There's a need there for it. All right, any other questions? office staff. Okay. All right. To the applicant.

Uh Mr. Chairman, Clark Hobby Hobby and Hobby PA 109 North Rush Street. Uh haven't been sworn yet. I was hoping that we could hear from staff since this has a proposed binding concept plan that goes with the companion reszoning. I think it would be in the board's interest and the public's interest to hear what the actual proposal is because the sub areas are only telling you a very small part of this story and I think the board needs to hear that and the public does as well before a decision is made.

So you want to hear you want to have the zoning?

I was hoping to take the zoning with this. So staff is would make that presentation then I would make my pres joint presentation after that. Right.

But I heard we weren't going to hear the zoning until a following meeting. Has that changed? No, that's on today as well.

Yes.

Oh, no, but I heard

But it's it's a transmitt.

No, this this is a small scale.

I don't know this vote.

Amy Tol, uh, you're confusing North Pasco. It's also on this agenda. Okay.

So, Adrien Phillips is a small scale. There's a companion MPD zoning. North Pasco is going to request the

contain then. All right. So, you want staff for the presentation on that?

So, I was hoping we could do the staff presentation on the MPU that goes with this today.

Okay. Is the board okay with that? Square ma'am.

Uh we will

we would

Yeah.

Do you want me to do resounding the swearing? Sure.

There are two resounding agendas. Regular consent. Staff will present each application to the board of county commissioners. If staff or planning commission has recommended approval and there is no opposition, the application will be considered by the board without further presentation. If staff or planning commission has recommended denial or if there is opposition to the application, the applicant will be given five minutes for presentation, the opposition will be given three minutes for each individual or five minutes for group representative and the applicant will be given three minutes for rebuttal. Any individual disagreeing with staff or planning commission recommendation or anyone wishing to object to any condition of the resoning may at this time request the petition be pulled from the consent agenda. in which case that application will be heard under regular agenda later on during the meeting. Otherwise, all resoning applications on the consent agenda will be approved by a single motion and vote. If you wish to speak to any petition, please give your name and address and whether or not you've been sworn for the record. These are quasi judicial public hearings. The law in Florida is that mere public support or opposition of an application is insufficient for this board to take action. Please limit your comments to those criteria found within the board's land development code. Mr. Clerk, would you swear the public in for the reasonzoning agendas?

Yes, sir. Uh, anyone intending to speak on any of the reasonzoning items to come up on the agenda? If you would please rise. Again, if you have any intent of speaking to a reasonzoning item, you please stand and please raise your right hand. Do each of you swear or affirm the testimony you will give in these matters is the truth. So have you got

uh at the time you come forward to the podium please announce that you were sworn so that will be of record. Thank you.

As it relates to uh I'm assuming this is P67.

Yes.

Okay. So, we have proof of publication in the dece uh December 17th, 2025 edition of the Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

Good afternoon, William Vermillion Planning Development Economic Growth. Before I get started today, we did have some expartes submitted to the clerk's office for the rest. This is PDE 267837, the companion reszoning to the comprehensive plan amendment. This is to allow the maximum development of 73,500 ft of commercial retail, 74,000 ft of office, 275 hotel rooms, 125 platted town home units, and 325 multif family apartments. or the original 315,000 square feet of commercial and associated infrastructure on approximately 32.5 acres. And the reason that I say or in some later slides I'll get into a couple wrinkles with this one as it pertains to the land entitlements and uh the amount of months in which certain entitlements are valid versus the original 315,000. This is located at the northeast corner of Overpass Road and Old Pasco Road in the central market area. Here's the location map showing the aerial just to the south overpass road as well as old Pasco Road. As you move to the west, the existing zoning, the existing future land use reflecting comm. Here is a context map showing the area in general with the subject site Overpass Road and Old Pasco Road. It is worth noting that the completion of the old Pasco widening on the CIP is due to be done in November of 2026 this year. To the northwest you have the Cypress Creek school campus. To the north the existing Grandanthm NPUD which is single family detached housing. As you move across 75, uh, moving east, you have the Wildcat Bales Connected City MPD, which is the site of the John's Hopkins Children's Hospital. And then as you move to the south of the John's Hopkins Children's Hospital, across Overpass Road, you have the Wesley Chapel District Park. And then as you move further back to the east, south of Overpass Road or to the west, you have Life Church MPD, which is single family detached. And further south from that is the Overpass Business Park MPD. This is the master plan which doesn't show you too much but we do have a binding concept plan which can shed a little bit more detail. So here in the in the mixeduse proposal and before I get started on explaining what what's happening in this binding concept plan, this binding concept plan is valid with those entitlements that I previously mentioned. The commercial, the hotel, the office, the multif family and the platted town homes uh for a period of 24 months in which the applicant has time to submit building permits. If those building permits are not submitted within 24 months, the application for such building permits, this property for the remaining four years of the MPD's expiration date of the six years would revert back to that 315,000 ft of commercial retail. So, it really is an option in which we we give this mixeduse product a time to develop and if they don't, we're still left with the original entitlement here that a lot of

the board seems to like at this location. However, um it does give this mixeduse development a chance to uh to come to fruition. So, explaining this binding concept plan here, the the entrance off of old old Pasco Road to the south where that that four laning has occurred. There is a main uh boulevard in effect. that's being created in between the mixeduse uh commercial buildings there as you move into the property. Buildings D and B which are commercial non-residential buildings which have on street parking alongside them are pulled up to the roads as well as having proper pedestrian infrastructure there as indicated by the yellow dash line and the blue dash line. The that yellow dash line is indicating that it's a it's a 10-ft path in which these buildings would be fronted on with uh with that on street parking. As you move across the roundabout, you get to your first uh vertically integrated mixeduse building, which is building MF1 there, which is also lining the street with angled parking. To the south of that, another non-residential building. And then that building HA is for the hotel. You can see the platted town homes are at the eastern extent of the property there that has a trail that both uh meanders the storm water facility as well as bifurcates the town homes to allow the residents of the town homes to both activate the mixeduse portions of the property as well as the central park amenity which is central to this mixeduse development. The MF2 building that you can see along the central park is also vertically integrated as well with some office space. And the buildings MF6, MF5, MF4, and MF3, those are single-use residential buildings. All of which oriented along a pedestrian network, a centralized park amenity that allows residents to be able to access the mixeduse portions of this project. It is worth noting that in between buildings MF6 and MF2, the applicant and staff work to create a a park feature that breaks up the otherwise what would have been a large parking field in between building MF6 and MF2. So there is a nice secondary park feature that breaks up what could be a monotonous sea of parking.

Commission.

Yes, Mr.

I understand what makes MF1 a vertical mixeduse building. I think there's a commercial piece there up on the corner. What makes MF2 a vertical mixeduse building since you have it called out?

Sure. So, right now contemplated, of course, it's all rough. They there's not exactly end users in for each one of these buildings, but right now um it is slated um to have some office in that southern quadrant of MF2. In the conditions of approval, we do have a minimum amount of square footage that does have to be vertically integrated within both of these buildings.

Okay. So it could be like a we work kind of

Yes, ma'am. Okay.

Absolutely. You do also see uh as you move south, this project provides two pedestrian connections to the pedestrian facilities on the north side of Overpass Road, which can allow pedestrians to uh access as you move towards John's Hopkins Children's Hospital and a hotel that can allow people to stay at um for tournaments at sports that happen at Wesley Chapel District Park, as well as three pedestrian connections to the overpass road pedestrian facilities, which will allow um students that would be able to walk to school. If I went back to that context, Mac, to that Cypress Creek school campus and through the previous projects I know that we've worked with through the board, we've done a good job of getting the pedestrian facilities along this road up to the schools and then all the way up north to 52. And so, as I as I previously mentioned, there's 24 months to submit a building permit application for this mixeduse project. And after that time, this would revert back to the original 315 square feet of commercial retail. But the the nuance to the to the commercial retail is we actually did add new design guidelines to the original 315,000 ft of commercial retail. To the extent that the original proposal of the original approval actually came to fruition after the 2-year period, it is more um planning forward and planning sound than the original approval in 2020. um by way of limiting um some of the uh the sizes of some uses that we know the commissioners aren't necessarily fans of as well as creating some building orientation of those non-residential uses along an internal drive aisle. There are a couple variations uh with this project here. The first from 9016 D11 the street access to adjoining property. The applicant pro request did not provide an interconnection to the north or to the east due to existing site constraints. Um if I was to take you back to the north is the um platted grantham in QVD. But in between there's actually a storm water drainage easement there that serves as drainage retention for the widening of Old Pasco Road. And then of course as you move um towards I75 there's a category 1 wetland there. The other variation request from 8056 restrictions on postdevelopment wetlands and upland buffers. This is for the um for the maintenance of common areas for the for the applicant and the master developer to be able to retain those common areas in their maintenance. From 9052 from in internal landscaping and buffering. This is to reduce the buffering in between uses within this mixeduse project in order to promote walkability. And then from 9071G parking requirements uh right now um

what are the parking requirement changes?

Yes sir. So the the applicant is proposing 1.6 spaces per dwelling unit instead of the requirement of it's usually two plus the additional 0.25 for visitor parking which it comes to a total of 2.25 25. The applicant's requesting 1.6. This is uh this is well above the Institute of Transportation Engineers 85th percentile of parking calculations required for a development such as this, especially when you talk about the mixeduse component and shared parking that can occur um legally through the crow by right anyhow with the the spaces that are going to be allowed um by the non-residential development. You know, I'm a little confused why be allowing that change when with all the apartments we've got, which we're over supplied on. I think the Shimberg report clearly shows that to keep us out of live local, but one of the things we said we're going to do is to keep make sure our parking requirements we're going to keep at that 2.25. So, that was something that we talked about, but I don't know why you give the variance for that.

Sure. it from from a planning perspective, it it allows for a more compact development that's not um overrun by seas of parking and allows pedestrians to more easily access the non-residential mixeduse development that's occurring to the south, especially when it's um the Institute of Transportation Engineers says that this is above the 85th percentile of required parking.

I've got the same engineers that tell me State Road 54 is not crowded. Go ahead. Yeah. This does uh come to you guys with a re No, not to you guys to the commissioners with a with a recommendation of approval of the proposed substantial amendment with the attached conditions of approval.

That's what I got.

I'm here for any more questions. I I did catch myself that time.

I wonder what they really call us.

All right. So before you go, um

I asked when I had a meeting with and my exparte um I had my assistant Sonia pull up a presentation from uh January says January 2nd, 2025. Um and on it it actually shows there were five to six there actually shows five multifamily uh buildings and now you've gone to six though you have some mixed juice down below but you've increased the number of buildings for that for the hotels uh there were two hotel sites and now you've gone down to one hotel site so I don't see where we've made improvements on this project other than for you to have a little bit more. Maybe that's just because of uh some design with your use, but uh I don't know. I think it's actually gotten worse from what was actually back in January.

Sure. Sure. Um Gina, are you pulling up I don't I don't recall that we we to full transparency, we've worked on this plan for about three years, so I've seen 14 or 15 iterations of this one. I know at one point in time we did have multiple hotels but as the design con discussion was modified throughout the course of the years um some of those uses did change slightly for our internal um our internal design. So um to the extent that the commissioners are seeking an additional hotel I'm sure the applicant would be more than willing to address if they could or could not add that hotel in. Okay. Um, so let me just talk one more one more thing with the Shimbe report. It shows that we do have an over supply of market rate apartments. Correct.

Yes, sir. I believe the the number at 120% specifically for Pasco County's in the study that was done was 10,000 dwelling units of multif family, 120% AMI and that at 140% AMI. They didn't have a study for Pasco County, but they did study the Tampa St. Pete Clearwater MSA.

I'm just confused why staff would approve commercial in that we had set aside at an interchange to allow more residential when we said we didn't want residential and then to give the parking break and then even allow more buildings for multif family, less hotel. It just doesn't seem to go along with what we've talked about in the past.

Sure. And I I can't speak to the to the surplus housing study. I wasn't a part of that. Um

you're not aware of it.

I am aware of it. I'm just saying I wasn't a part of the of the study in which it came to fruition. So I I'm not going to speak to the the study, but I can speak to

Hold on. Isn't that relevant information as a planner to kind of go through and kind of study what's around you? I mean

Oh, absolutely. It is relevant. And I would say that housing in this area is still needed even though there's a surplus for the entire county. I don't think it speaks to a surplus in this particular area. I don't think it breaks it down into that level of granular detail. And I think with the employment coming online coupled with Double Branch and John's Hopkins as well as to the south at the uh the business park, I think that making the leap that uh residential is something that would be um necessary here is is not one that is is a far leap to make.

Well, let's let's take a look. You got John Hopkins right beside it. Um, big doctor's hospital. A lot of doctors going to be looking for office space around. There's a shortage of office space around where doctors can actually own their own building and go forward knowing that the doctors going to want to be nearby. This seems to me would be actually a great spot for office space compared to not. Um, so I'm not I'm not sure why. As much as you can industrial jobs for distribution centers, again, it's not job creators like this one could be. And again, for us to look at comm and to go and allow more multifamily wouldn't be pushing harder for the commercial development of office space. It just it's it strikes me why we wouldn't look. Um if you could do you Oh, you know what? I sent my um pictures to Gina Jeffers my videos. She Oh, this year. All right.

Can you can you show my videos so I just can review this a little bit so everyone can see it? No, I got the view on overpass.

I think I'm through yet.

All right.

What's the video?

It just shows you coming down from overpass going across I75.

I do

I sent them I sent them earlier today. Sir,

I do think it's it is worth pointing out that this mixeduse development with its entitlements does generate more and additional operating revenue for the county in terms of advalorum taxes as a proportion of the BCC operating costs. The original 315,000 would roughly generate half a million dollars per year in Adalorium to the operating budget. The mixeduse development would generate about a million per year.

Okay.

Can you go you know can you go back to the sorry can you go back to the the site plan?

Certainly. Uh so in the a commercial non-residential restaurant retail office so they can have office in there in A B C and D. I mean I I hear what you're saying but they there is a possibility for office there. It makes me think of um North Point where there's restaurants below and offices above and certainly that's a great opportunity here. Absolutely.

What's the parking ratio at North Point?

I don't know the parking ratio off the top of my head, but I can have that pulled up.

You can't park in the front grill, but you can park in the back.

I'm just tell

you just don't think about going in the back.

Park, but I'm sure they had good logic why they did it.

It's like my daughter-in-law's favorite place to go cuz it's nice. It's pretty. I mean, it's it's a very nice North Point. No, no, it is.

It's a lovely development.

Any other questions?

Okay.

How How many apartment units are in there?

Yes, ma'am. It'll be 325 is the maximum.

That is a lot. Commissioners Clark, Hobby, Hobby, and Hobby PA. If I could have uh my time for both of these items, and if I can get my PowerPoint pulled up, that would be great. I'll run you guys through this shortly, and then I want to focus on some higher level things. But let me start off by saying this. This is how I look at this project. The project uh is located at Overpass and Old Pasco. When the county acquired the rightway to build the interchange at Overpass, it also acquire acquired the rights that go with creating access to Overpass Road. For that reason, the existing owner tried to market the property and met with very little success. No one was interested except like a gas station guy and a oneoff uh you know like Taco Bell kind of use because they don't have the access that the larger users want to have. And so a series of things started to happen and this live local project idea came up at you know during that time and I was called by our client who's the Ryan companies that I'm going to uh speak to in a minute and I said and the Ryan companies folks said we will absolutely not invoke and not be involved in a project that invol in invokes live local and tries to take commercial property take the tax benefits out of the county and convert it without any zoning rights uh of the county commission to an affordable housing project. So, we wouldn't be involved. And I've spent the last two plus years working with your staff to create what I believe this board really wants. And we hear this all the time. I'm going to hammer on a couple of things and y'all hear this all the time. Where's my place to go? I'm so tired of drive-ins. I'm so tired of going to places that only have quick serve restaurants. There's no place for my family to go. I was promised all this stuff in East Pasco and there's nothing for us to do and everything's based on convenience trips in a car and everybody's got a drive-thru. There no sit down restaurants, there no quality office places right now. Uh there's a few smaller office places, but there's no sense of place there. The a place like I'm going to show you does not exist in our county right now. And what we're talking about doing is building a town center type development where people will pull in there and they're going to park in their angled parking and get out and walk over to this central park and they're going to go in the restaurants and they're going to take their kids around in this open oversized central park that's heavily amenized with gigantic sidewalks with a lot of the mindset that is going into the development that we all saw at Wiregrass and that the board heavily supported there. That's what we're trying to do here. And what happened was we got the Ryan Companies and I'm going to start going through our presentation now. The Ryan Companies is one of the largest mixeduse developers in North America. They know what they're doing and they're very, very few of these folks that actually build the buildings

know how to build mixeduse product. It's not just, hey, I'm going to sell off a pod for this and a pod for that, and I hope somebody builds nice stuff. Absent what Pi is going to build on the townhouse portion of this project. And we're very happy to have them, and they build much nicer than entrylevel town houses, Ryan is not only developing it, they're building the buildings, and it's high-end stuff. Large company with a national presence. They've made large investments in other Pasco projects over many years that you see here, including the first Amazon facility that got built near 54. They've got medical office stuff that they built. This is one example of what these guys have built and are building this mixeduse project called Highland Bridge. It is a massive town center that is a huge economic benefit for the area in which it's built. I believe it's in Minnesota. Yeah, it's in St. Paul, Minnesota. But people love going there. They love living there. They love working there. And that's what this project's going to do. You know where the site is. I don't need to bore you on that. And the background.

Mark, can I ask you a question?

Maybe it's going to be on are B, D, and C twotory to threetory.

They're they they can be, but they're not required to be. Let me give you an example. So there's a chance that what D is may be a hotel. and we specifically called out the right to have it be multi-story for that purpose. It our current design has it as retail. Um but the the main thing you all got to understand about this design and the layout is if you look along the frontage of the site that one thing that's con conspicuously missing that we see on every other commercial site is where are my out partials? That's what normally finances commercial only projects. Yeah.

And I and I I've got clients I spend a lot of my time building those around the southeast and we do very well doing it. There are not this is my only client that I have other than the wiregrass guys that can build a true town center setup like this. They are not out there. They're just not. And the reason why there aren't is it's hard as hell to do and it's very expensive to do. And the only way you're able to build these vertically mixeduse buildings like this has which includes it's going to have a 12 to 15,000 twostory we work facility that will cost 4 to5 million. Okay. We don't have anything like that in Pasco County and we don't have anything that's pedestrianoriented so that local restaurants will go in there. The the national chains are not going to go in this site. The only uh site that even allows uh a drive-thru is the small partial A. And we're hoping that that may be without throwing a name out there, a national coffee use that a lot of people drink. Uh the rest of them, we're talking to a series of local restaurants. We're talking to some steak chains. Uh we're talking to some locally based steak chains. That's what our community needs. Um, this whole thing is driven by this binding concept plan and I've never worked on a project that has this level of specificity and requirements. And I want to echo one thing that staff said uh before that I think is critical. The multif family in this project cannot receive any cos until they build at least 15,000 square ft of vertically mixed use stuff in buildings MF1 or two and they build all of the pad ready stuff for the balance of the site. So it's not ever going to happen that this site is just a multifamily only. This all works together, but it's the town houses and the multif family that are subsidizing the retail. Again, you all are no dummies. You don't the reason we don't see anybody building anything like this because they can't afford it. You need a critical site like this to do it on. And and and that's why that's why my client John's Hopkins is so uh adamant in supporting this project. When we approved got the John's Hopkins MPUD approved uh w with Wildcat, it included 725 potential multif family units. The PAD area grew so big for the hospital and their internal medical office building. It's important you all know the John's Hopkins project is going to have 3 to 400,000 square feet of its own medical office building. Commissioner, that's where it's going, where it should go on their site. But they want this project because they want the people who are in uh families who have people in the hospital, children in the hospital, and their employees to have a place to live, work, and play. And this project's in the South Market area, and you all moved it into the uh urban service area within the last year.

But the that I assume that's my first five minutes. Yeah. The the reason why it's located in those two things and why we're doing what we're doing today is because the South Market area specifically says that you're supposed to create vertically mixeduse residential. You're supposed to bring more density and intensity and you're supposed to promote higher density compact development uh that creates mixeduse communities that are live work. That's what the comp plan says is supposed to go here. It's it's I mean, you know, I know we built a lot of other stuff in the South Market area in the in the urban service area, but this is what we've been supposed to be doing all along. This is the right use. And and and I would say it was pointed out by one commissioner, the project does include uh the bu ability to build a minimum of 74,000 office. So, commissioner does include that. It's got the retail, it's got the office, it's got the hotel, it's got the town houses, and it's got the multif family. Those are the complimentary uses that you need to put in very close proximity with pedestrian connectivity to create a town center and that's what we're doing here. That's what the area needs. It makes more money for the county than the existing zoning. It doesn't. And one more thing just to further clarify what staff said about the existing zoning. You know, the board has gotten very picky about which C2 and C1 uses are allowed in our commercial areas. The existing MPU has almost none of that regulation. We can go out and build a bunch of gas station self storage, you know, mini storage and crap like that that we already have too much of in the county. This fixes that. And even if this project didn't uh build out that way, we added new design uh guidelines if there are no residential in here at all to prevent some of those uses happening. So, it's a win-win for the county, I believe. Um couple just last things I would say. The area around the site is being fourlaned as we talk about. It goes past the school and Barbara Willilhides client is building a little further than that. So, by the time this project gets built, it'll be a four-lane road past the school, including a brand new multi-use path. So, our students on this site are going to walk out there to the multi-use site, multi-use path, walk up the road, and go to the elementary school

walk. are going to get on those

or get on their bike or scooter or whatever and then the employees are going to walk down to Overpass and walk over to the hospital right across the road. And we upscale all of the walkways on the site. We are putting in more landscaping than I've seen in any other project to create a great town center feel. We moved the buildings up to the uh right ofway. all great and important urban design things. But again, we could leave things the way they are today. There's no question we could. And what's going to happen is the board is going to be leaving in place a commercial development form that people only drive around in cars and go to uses like gas stations and quicks serve restaurants that they can do anywhere else. And if the board wants that, you can do that. but is extremely shortsighted in my opinion. And we need to give this quality mixeduse developer the opportunity to build the kind of sense of place that we hear every day ought to be built. And I'll say one other thing. I'm going try not to get emotional because it's important to me. My dad grew up in a rental house two blocks that way. And the re and he lived there till he was age 13. And the reason why his family lived there is because they walked to work right in these buildings over here and they shop downtown. You have to have these uses together. There's nothing wrong with rental properties when they're located in the right areas. This isn't the gated community that you see with every other apartment community. This is an actual community where people will live, work, and play. this is what we should be doing. And that's what made my family grow out of that little ward house over there and made my dad the man they ended up becoming. So, thank you.

Thank you, Gina. Would you um try those videos? So, this just takes you from uh overpass road going across to where the site is. And to me, visibility is a big thing. There's a great opportunity to have a office where people can actually be seen from the highway. This is this is the this is the middle one, but

I try the worst one of them all. All right. Anyway, the exp technology.

All right. So, anyway, the exposure from I75 is huge. Um, now Clark, you and I had talked many times about uh other opportunities that are out there as far as to get jobs. Um, and I know you're told by these people, but I know you've talked to Lane himself and and literally where Lane is at, he told you he looked all around. He couldn't find any office space that he could own and buy nothing. He goes to the new place and now he's growing so fast he can't get out of that place or he can't buy another he can't buy another place in there even to rent right now because there's no office space available. Commissioner I'm not No, I'm going to finish.

Yes, sir. Okay. I thought you not yet. I'm commenting.

Okay. Yes, sir.

All right. So, I know we've talked about this for over a year plus,

right?

And I I said there's a market out there and you told me that there's nothing out that you can find. I will tell you the people that developed this park that Lane is at right now, they have done this continually, successfully, and I asked them if they're in the market to do more and they said absolutely, we'd love to see it. Love to go do it.

Yes, sir.

So, for you to tell me the board that there's not that opportunity out there. I don't think you guys have looked at it or I think you're being told from Ryan the wrong thing. Now, when we looked at things from many, many years ago, when we set up our comprehensive plan, we put all our employment centers together. This overpass road wasn't in there because it wasn't an overpass yet.

Right?

Since it became that, we wanted to create jobs out of there.

Right

now, with all the things going on, part of the reason I show the video is from the highway, just like down below with the other project, which you were great at doing with Rooker,

right?

Down below, bringing those big industrial jobs in, right? This is a different product. Um, I think there's an opportunity to do elevated uh office buildings going all the way up

complet. And commissioner, I think you're spot on. I I want there might be a slight misunderstanding of what this project can and does allow. If I might, and I'm trying to cut you off, the the point of these nonresidential buildings is that they can have retail or office or both. They can be single or doublestory. Okay. And if Lane or anyone else wants to come in and build more of those buildings other than what we're going to build, like I said, we are building office. That's what We Work is. We're we're building a very large. It's the most expensive we work building that has been built in the county. But if Mr. Mendlesson, our our friend, wants to come in and occupy and take some of this down. We have both the entitlements and we have the buildings to do it. There's nothing to stop it. It's either it can only be one of three things.

Office, retail, or mixed use. That's all those buildings can be.

So, it's it's doing what you want. And I believe it's going to I believe what's you're going to find, Commissioner, it's going to provide the opportunity to build nicer office than we even have because of the amenities there. And that's what when we look at places like Midtown, Midtown has a lot of office space and it in Tampa and granted it's at Dale Mabry and 75, but what the young people, the young workers are looking for is highly amenitized developments that they can walk to on site with their office that have retail and other services. And that's why Midtown got Tikico's moving in there and I think a 500,000 foot building. This is what I think the employees are going to want.

So I think that again before you had five multif family buildings, now you got six. Now you get a couple of stories or a couple of floors of the wei work. I'm talking about office doctor spaces and multi multi level. I don't know how tall these buildings going to be. All of them are allowed to the any of the ones in blue can be multi-story and they're I can't remember what the height is but it's very high you know because we're in the urban service area and we more or less got rid of the height requirements in mo most of them. Do I think it's going to be a 10story building very unlikely but if the demand is there is Ryan company is a multi-billion dollar company that's built office space all over North America if the demand is there. They're going to try to meet it. That's their job. I'm going I'm going to disagree with you because if you're going to talk about doing multi-story where you should be putting a multi-story is out to where that lake is where it can be seen from I75 and you're only going to see it from elevated things from three stories up that you're going to go to. So by putting the town homes out there, you're taking away the best property that could be out there for your office space that could go vertical and create that demand. You've actually minimizing it by putting the office there. That's the worst place you could put the town owners in that spot there if you're going to get if you're going to really create office. So with the demand that's out there, as I say, he can't find any. The developer says he would build some, but you are taking it away by setting up that design the way it gets set. You cannot go vertical with the town homes there. You're not going to see it from the highway. You don't get the benefit. All the big buildings you see on all the major roadways. That's where the visibility is. You're blocking it by the town homes being out there to the front.

I would disagree for one reason. Go ahead.

John's Hopkins had this site under contract before they went across the road. And do you know why they didn't go on this site? If you look to the east of that pond, there's a gigantic cypress uh dome in there. And the trees are about 60 or 70 ft high. You can't see it from the highway. It completely blocks it. That's why Hopkins went across to the other site at Wildcat cuz I was I was there.

If you come from the south, you can see it from across. If you're coming down the highway and you're up six, seven, eight stories, you can see it. It's above that

and you can hit the top.

I'm only telling you what what the actual hospital decision was. That was the biggest reason why Johns Hopkins didn't go on this site because it does not have the visibility because of the wetland system. I mean, I'm only telling you that's a fact.

And again, I I was trying to get the videos up to to show you actually.

It's a fact. I mean, that that's why they went across there. I was on the phone call with them.

Yeah. So with your visibility, you can't get to 75 and you can see it from coming through with the interchange coming up and down through.

Leave at five o'clock today.

Okay. Appreciate that. Thank you.

Um and again back back to your back back to the apartments go up and down and yeah from here to the school. It'll get full lane by the time this comes out of the ground.

What am I going to do with everything? I got apartments up in 52 on this side of the road on Old Pasco. Still two lane. I don't have that funded. We're not generating any more traffic. Let me finish my statement first. Yes, sir. I can go back down to the south all the way to 0 54. I got all these new apartments coming in here. I got jam traffic up and down 54 and I know I can see all the traffic studies in the world to tell me we're not failing, but we're crowded and that people are tired of getting crowded. To bring more apartments in when I could be focused on just jobs would be a much better way to go. If I might say about the traffic, a fundamental assumption of this project is that it's designed specifically not to add any more traffic. It's trip neutral to trip negative. It doesn't generate any more trips, commissioner. That's a fact. I mean, it's staff can can tell you from the transportation study, we didn't do a new traffic study. And the reason why is we set the entitlements up specifically not to generate any more trips. So, that's that's a red herring. Well, if you're going to bring trips, you're going to tell me you're not going to genuinely trips, but you're going to tell me all the people from the area. You're going to go to these all these nice places that are inside here. That's going to generate trips. And if these people

315,000 square feet of commercial only on there now, when you have a mixture of uses, it the trips stay on site. It's called trip capture. It's not going to have more trips. Commissioner, I I understand you're you're opposed to the project. I do. I understand you're you're you're making your points and and I appreciate it. You made you made the statement the all these nurses and doctors are going to walk over across overpass. You really think it's going to happen?

They can.

When it rains, you think it's going to happen?

They they can, Commissioner. That's why I mean why why did we spend the money on the multi-use pass if we don't want people to work walk it? I mean, that's what we did.

Work, play, etc. But I'm telling you, as far as when it gets rainy, et back and forth.

Well, it's not raining. I mean, I understand, Commissioner.

I'm just saying I would. If it's raining, I'm not

When it's 90 degrees, they going to walk all the way across that. It's about a mile.

Okay,

Mr. Chairman. Yes,

you still have public comment. I suggest you go to that and then you can have

debate. We have no one signed up for this item.

Questions?

The board.

I had some questions. I'll

just staffer to Mr. Jav. So you mentioned in the Wildcat site there's 725 multif family units that were associated with it. Are you saying those are not going to be built? Is that what you're

what I what I can say commissioner and and you know I've I've verified this with John's Hopkins

very

I know it's very important I understand let me let me be very clear on it the that project just on the wildat portion not including the bales portion but just on the wildat portion that John's Hopkins owned has 725 multifamily units approved for it when we got it approved there was a portion of the development on the east side of Mckendry Road of the extension, the way it was done that we anticipated would be a standalone apartment site. And there was a lot of discussion internally about maybe needing to sell that site to get some money to help build the apartment and to subsidize the hospital. But what happened was the road had to curve in such a way and so much rightway was needed for Mckendry that all we're left with after the ponds are in for Mckendry is six acres. Almost every multifamily project that's built now that has 300 units is on about 12 to 15 acres. And so what I can tell you, and this was reconfirmed this morning from my contacts at John's Hopkins, they do not believe that in the short or intermediate term there's going to be any multif family on their site at all. They don't anticipate that. Could there be in 25, 30 years? potentially, but right now there's not enough land to do a multif family project

that could become office potential.

Could be. It's they have additional sufficient office entitlements over there, but they're not even investigating using any of their site for multif family anymore because they just don't have the land. So, they're they're trying to do hospital and medical office building on their sites. So because the correlation between the two sites are are so close, I guess to our staff, how can we confirm that? Because that point that he's making is going to be a piece of the decision I want to make and I'm not prepared to make a decision until we know what the book end is doing.

Well, Commissioner, it's a matter of a seller records. The only site that's not already approved that the main pad site already has its approval down by Overpass and Mckendry on the Wildcat portion. The only site if you look at the the site plans for the road that you all have approved. There's only a 6acre site left. That's it.

I mean that's that's simply not anywhere big enough to build uh uh apartments in you confirming on the private sector side, but I I really want confirmation from professional staff.

Okay, understood.

Predominantly because I'm still not over and this is simply principle,

right?

How this has come to fruition because of the state's live local act. The only reason we're here talking about this is because the live local gun was pointed to our head and I still haven't let that go from my crawl. I I understand trying

but it it still is not sitting well and so I want to look at the overall big picture of this area if our staff members are also listening because there's a plethora of housing that's been approved in connected city connected city is also supposed to have some level of downtown amenity that's not so far away right

and if that's I don't want this to be the reason that they don't build theirs

or vice versa you know I love to have competing places to go, but in the overall schematics of the big picture of this area and everything that's that's happening, we've literally got one opportunity to get it right. And the only reason we're talking about the residential component there, there are pieces of this plan I like a lot. There are pieces of this plan I don't like at all.

Right?

So, we're kind of stuck. But if I can get some help understanding the overall housing mix of what's to come and what's not to come with what's happening with the building of the hospital and you know real life scenario that's going to be a factor in my decision on this project. So if that answer can't become today then maybe we baptize there to to to continue it I guess maybe but I got to hear from all the US over there

David Engel planning and economic development director uh commissioner whiteman you had asked that the staff was listening I'm taking copious notes got hand cramp I will check in with the John Hopkins folks to confirm if or not they're going to put in a garden apartments on their Thank you.

Thank you.

And David, I'm going to go to Commissioner Oak in a second, but if you would have the staff check and see how many parking spots are allowed at the North Point Plaza

at North Point.

Yeah. Did it go down like a one

where the EC is? Uh

where the EC is? Yeah.

All right. There's no residential in there. There's just commercial office.

No, not not not in the downtown area.

No, no, not in the downtown voted to add apartments. It was quite performance by betross.

Commissioner Oakley.

Well, I just want to make a statement on when John Hopkins came to buy that property and they were they were happy with the property, but I think after they' got into it and bought it and was going to bring the hospital there, they found out that they wish they had bought a much bigger property because I think they were going to make the hospital even bigger than it than it can be on this site. But that's probably what's affected the fact that you can only have that one six acre piece there. So, they've used it up in other offices, doctor's offices and things like that because Yeah.

because I've heard they like the they really like the site. They wish it even had more land.

Oh, yeah. The the site they have now where they're building the hospital, they love that site cuz it got better visibility and had more land. They wish they did have more land, but that the requirement was when they they had to get a super pad site for the hospital and their medical office building south of the road that had to be I think the initial requirement was between 25 and 30 acres. And once we put the rideway and all the ponds in there, that pretty much ate up almost all the usable site

that affected our site.

Yeah.

Happy to answer any other questions.

No public comment.

No public comment. there there wasn't anybody objecting from us

you know um

Mr. Starky

thank you u we worked with

the developer developers over and over again to get to get to where we are today um you can't have that vertical mixed use without some density around it they don't that's what that's what feeds the machine um I my angst has always been that those town homes are not rear loaded that's That's my thing. Um, but other than that, I think this is a good addition to the to the community. They as far as the um multif family there, they won't get financing for it until there's until there's a demand. I mean, that's what's going on right now, right? Funding's not quite there yet. So, you won't you won't see those come up yet. You might see the town homes. Um, I don't remember what the rules rules were there, but Uh, I think so close to the intersection of overpass and 75 is the right place for density. I always say the uh when you're near a big uh infrastructure investment like that, that's where you put the density and you leave it and like out here in East Pasco where you don't have all that infrastructure investment, you leave it less dense. So, I'm I'm okay with this. I I think um I hope I can go have a wonderful meal.

I will too. Um another thing about this product that this is going to bring more ad on taxes what I understand than than other projects on the same site. This one's going to bring much more to the county.

Well, keep in mind we we talk about apartments and you had the sheriff say mil for services. We got to add more deputies every every year. We got to add 10 more because of the increased apartments we have out there. So, they may be bringing 20. So, they may bring more money in, but you're going to spend more money, too. It's not a it's not a winner as far as that goes. As far as like all this uh again more apartments up and down, I mean, you've got so many that are still coming online up and down the street. Some of you have like, you know, rent signs because they have to get a so much tra so much so many buildings out there right now.

Yeah.

I mean, just to add that much more traffic at this point in time, especially while the all the traffic still going out there. I mean, you see it everywhere. I mean, I don't know. I hear about it. I I I my people are telling me no more, no more, no more. And then again, to take a commercial site that we wanted to create jobs on, it just at at a prime intersection to go bring town homes and PY is fantastic, right? Great product, nothing but great things to say about PY. But as far as to bring in more multifamily when you could have more office in there, when there's clearly demand, I mean, Lane, he would live right down the street. He would love to have been there,

right? still could even expand because he's got to expand out. He can't expand where he's at. We even had lunch today, David and I, with another group. Guy's trying to move his corporate headquarters from Palm Beach, from Tennessee to Texas, bring everything down to Pasco. You know what? He can't find a place to go back.

Turkey ranch.

We're waiting for I'm just telling you.

They got a nice

Commissioner, if you if you know of any of those people, put them in contact with me and Ryan company will bring them to Pasco County. That's what they do. that I mean I Lane is a friend and he's doing great things for the county. These guys do largecale employment all over the US. We'd love to have him. Bring him on.

I don't know why they're not bringing more. I mean literally Clark No. No. Listen. Yes, sir.

I told you about Wayne. You met with Lane. Even the management company, the place he's at, if you talk to those people, they would say they they would love to develop here.

I would be happy to talk with Mr. Mendelson. I think he's doing a great job and he can take down some of our space.

It's not even No, he's not a builder. I'm talking about the builder that's got the property, got it filled out. They do dental, they do medical, they do office.

No, I understand. But we

But how how do we not know these people to bring them into the market? And you tell me we don't have anybody out there. That's where I get the struggle with this.

No, no. All I was saying was commissioner, I think we misunderstood each other. I was talking about spec building like three fourstory office buildings in a suburban market by itself that that has been shown right now. It's been very weak for several years. It may be much stronger here because of the various elements and amenities of this site. I'm that's why I'm saying we may be wildly successful with office with this because the young people want to work in places that have the restaurants and the walkability and the park in it. That's what they're looking for and I believe we will be successful. I think you're going to be pleasantly surprised and I will work with Mr. Mendlesson to try to help him.

It's not Mr. Mendelson, but it's the people that park. You keep saying Mr. Mendlesson. I'm talking about people that build these.

Okay. End the end users. Okay. Understood. Okay. I misunderstood. Anyway, thank you very much. I I believe the board will be very proud of this in years to come. I honestly believe that and I honestly believe this is the highest and best use of this project for the county.

All right. So, I'm going to I'm going to ask staff after I But if you would, Clark,

I'll stick around.

But the parking number to go down to 2.25 from 2.5 to 1.675. I don't want to see what we got at North Point where you can't find a place to park.

No, you just can't park in the front. You have to go around the building. in the intention of the intention of our client.

Oh, and that's safe.

But I mean, let's let's look if it's if it's not enough parking, there's not enough parking.

Commissioner, I can bring our client. I'll bring up Mr. Lynon from Ryan Companies and he can explain their intent. But I believe what the the the whole intent with this having all three elements in one site as opposed to North Point when they're broken broken up is it's much easier with a combination of uses to have shared parking. That that's what the IT code that staff was talking about because when people leave certain retail uses at one time of the day, people come in and need overnight parking. And that's how shared parking works in a true mixeduse development like that. But I'm going to I'm going to let uh Natt, if you'll come up and just speak to what your intent is cuz they're trying to create an area that isn't a sea of parking. That that's the main

and I don't want that.

I don't want people have enough to place to park.

I'm about to make a motion to approve.

Well, after he speaks, I

Hi, afternoon. Uh, I've been sworn in. Nathaniel Faniel Lindon Grinding Companies 2011 North Franklin Street, Sweet 3500, Tampa, Florida 33602. Um, the intent with the parking is that we are only providing what is needed. We've developed apartments throughout the country. We see that parking ratio is often in the ones, low ones in dense urban areas and it gets bigger as you get further out. In a mixeduse setting, we think 1.6 is absolutely viable and we don't want to provide any more parking than is needed. Okay, with that I make a motion to approve

6262.

I'm not ready to

Okay, you got a motion and a second.

Motion a second. Further discussion. I'm still waiting.

Yeah, I'm not prepared to make a decision on this until we know the bigger picture of play here with what's going on with the Wildcat site. I want to know if they're going to have 725 units that they were preparing to build that they're not able to build it. because if they're not, this is a significantly less number

and it's a mix of mix of uses. So

I think it's a fair question when you look at the overall picture and the schematics of this area.

John's Hopkins being thrown and injected right in the middle of this project as a basis to approve. I want to know what's going on on their site here.

Let's call the question.

All right. So roll call vote.

District one. Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two. Commissioner Wakeman.

You vote yay or nay? You can't abstain.

Nay.

District three. Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District four. Commissioner Joerger.

Hi.

District five. Chairman Mariana.

Nay. Passes 32. Second motion would be 467 which was the which is the companion zoning.

Have a motion.

Did you make a motion?

Second.

Does not require.

Okay. Any further discussion? I'll just say that that public that parking thing is just to me going to be a big issue just like it is down the street and much as nice and fancy of the walkway and the roundabout just like they have at North Point we're going to have the same thing.

All in favor say I.

I.

All oppose say nay. Nay.

41.

4 to one.

Item P63. We have approved publication in the Tampa Bay Times, November 26, 2025.

Good afternoon. Amy Tol, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Item P63 being PDE26-00004 is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section 802 tree preservation and replacement, section 802.1 intent and purpose. Section 802.2 applicability, renaming section 802.3 removal to exemptions. Creating section 802.4 tree canopy standards. Section 802.5 tree removal. Section 802.6 problem trees. Section 802.7 tree replacement and mitigation. Section 802.8 tree mitigation requirement. Section 802.9 trees of spe uh special significance. uh appendix a definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability uh prevailor and severability inclusion into the land development code and an effective date. Uh we do have staff here for presentation. Today is the first uh hearing first meeting on the land development code amendment. So there is no a no action required. presentation.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. Amanda Hill, Planning Development, Economic Growth. The purpose of this ordinance is to conduct a comprehensive update to section 802, tree preservation and replacement of the land development code to enhance tree protection within the county as directed by the board. Key updates to this code includes the addition of standards and incentives for tree canopy preservation, enhanced requirements for tree removal, clarification of the tree mitigation fund references, new and revised definitions related to tree protection, and minor revisions throughout the code for internal consistency and restructuring of section 802. At the August 21st LPA hearing, the LPA voted to continue the public hearing for the proposed amendments to remove outdated references to the free mitigation fund to September 18th, 2025. The LPA desired to allow stakeholders time to engage with BCC regarding the implications of resolution number 25-291. On September 18th, 2025, the LPA voted to continue the public hearing to the November 20th hearing and requested staff to provide the comprehensive proposed revisions being made to section 802 of the LDC for consideration. And that would be rather than only considering the changes that were related to the tree mitigation fund. And as such, we went back to the LPA on November 20th, at which point the LPA found the proposed amendments consistent with the comprehensive plan. Revisions were proposed by the LPA and incorporated into the draft by staff. Items of note include streamlining of the priorities for canopy preservation and included additional preservation incentive credits beyond the proposed 20% preserv preservation requirement. Uh these credits would be applied towards the total monetary contribution due based on the calculation of the fees per inch. Additionally, there was additional clarification that the fees are applicable after the submission of a completed site plan in accordance with sections 403 and 404 of the LDC. Staff completed multiple engagement opportunities with stakeholders over the last six months, including participation in public LPA workshops in June and August of last year. uh discussions with internal and external stakeholders and the comments from those discussions were incorporated as applicable into the draft and after the LPA hearing in November staff also presented the revised draft to ERPC's tree management group. So I'll now summarize the highlights of the proposed ordinance specifically focusing on the proposed canopy standards enhanced tree removal standards and the references to the tree mitigation fund in the code. So for the purposes of calculating the existing tree canopy the diameter at breast height or DBH of a tree will be used as a proxy for the coverage of the treere's canopy. Developments will be generally required

to maintain 20% of the total number of inches of existing tree canopy that are 10 inches in diameter and larger. The canopy will include each tree and the associated native vegetation within the drip line of the tree unless there is some sort of invasive species that's present in which case those would be required to be removed. There are some special cases that would allow for the preservation requirement to be reduced or to be exempt. So specifically for MUM and TND projects by nature of the design of those projects, those would likely result in the preservation of additional trees in excess of the 5% as part of the development. For sites with a notable percentage of protected wetlands and associated buffers, reducing the requirement allows for the site to retain usage of the other areas of the property. For commercial sites that are less than 5 acres, this could potentially cause sighting challenges. So, as such, they are exempt from the requirements of the section of the code. for minor rural subdivisions to maintain simplicity for families in rural areas interested in subdividing property. Those are also proposed to be exempt. And lastly, for industrial and redevelopment projects, we would like to ensure that the employment generating potential is maximized and those are also exempt. Now, not included in this table um are bonafideed agricultural lands. Uh those are already exempted from tree permit requirements in section 802, but we also included language within this subsection that also excludes them from the requirements of the tree county preservation standards. Passive recreation facilities including decks, boardwalks, paths, and trails are allowed within the tree canopy preservation areas and legal protection of the preservation area is required. Preserved trees are required to be located in areas that are not subject to flooding due to activities of related site development. Otherwise, appropriate drainage would be required to be installed. A key item that was discussed by the LPA was a provision of incentives for enhanced tree protection. Staff is proposing credits to incentivize the preservation of heritage trees, trees that are located within the landscape buffer, trees that are preserved adjacent to active recreational areas, and trees that are preserved in excess of the 20% requirement. If combined, these credits can result in a total discount of 75% to the total monetary contribution due to the tree mitigation fund. Additionally, in section 802.5, the previous tree removal standards have been revised by removing the discretionary option for a representative sample in the tree survey and adding a requirement for the tree health to be included on the tree inventory for all trees that are greater than 24 in. Moving on to the references for the tree

mitigation fund. So the previous contribution rates are revised in accordance with resolution number 25-291 approved by the board in July of last year. Additionally, as a result of discussions with the development community, the section of the code also proposes the inclusion of a maximum contribution rate of $3,500 per upland developable acre. Staff is also proposing regular evaluation of the contribution rates to the tree mitigation fund to provide consistency to interested parties regarding the schedule of future changes. This evaluation will consider the inflation rate and other applicable factors in addition to the performance of the existing tree protection standards. This subsection of the code also clarifies that the authorized locations, recipients, expenditures, distribution, and monitoring of funds shall be based on a resolution by the board. I do have some items for additional discussion with the board and uh some areas that I would like to request clarification from the board on. So, at the LPA public hearings, the LPA expressed concerns regarding the appropriateness of setting the contribution rates to the fund through resolution rather than through the adoption of an ordinance. staff that conducts additional research regarding this to consider the LPA's recommendation and observe that section 107 of the LDC fees uh authorizes the board to adopt by resolution all necessary fees to administer implement and enforce the code and then it continues the set fee may include provisions for consulting assistance as well. The LPA also noted that the previous fees were set by the board by resolution in 2005. However, it was better to execute future changes of the fees to the fund by ordinance. The approved fees under resolution number 25-291 along with the $3,500 cap are currently included in the draft amendment. However, direction is requested from the board to resolve the following. Should the contribution rates be referenced in the ordinance and the resolution or should it be exclusively referenced in the amended resolution which will be brought to the board for approval on February 17th this year? And should future contribution rates be amended by resolution or by ordinance? Staff will reflect the board's direction in the draft amendments which we brought to the board at that February 17th hearing. Uh, and staff recommends that the board adapt accepts public comment on this item. As previously mentioned, this is the first hearing. I do have an additional item for the board's consideration and discussion that is not directly related to the language that's being proposed for the code, but it's related to the tree mitigation fund. Can I continue or do you prefer to pause and then go to that item?

Uh, let's discuss this first. Okay.

And then we'll get to that part.

Okay. Um, Mr. County Attorney, the benefit to doing by resolutions easier than ordinance as far as making changes to the amounts.

I would never recommend that you put your fee schedule in an ordinance. Um, just generally the I have seen boards do resolutions that require a public hearing. um if you're wishing to get public input, but the fee schedule is really your your purview and um it just gets messy when you when you have to go back and amend the LDC and have to go through all of the public hearings that are required in in the LDC to to amend it. So, I wouldn't I wouldn't recommend it. You can legally do it if you wish.

No, I do not. I want to I want to make I want to keep it simple. when we make a change, it's easy to change rather than go spend public money going through processes.

Okay. Um, got a question for you. So, let's say you got a large commercial area and they have, let's bunch of trees toward the center part of the property and we want to keep 20%, and let's say it's about 20%. All of a sudden, they've got to hold that 20%. Is there a way to set something in the code where it makes it easy for them to go take those trees out? Uh to me, if we're going to have a developer making those changes and setting those things up, um and I do want to try to avoid things like Newport Corners where just everything gets taken out along the roadway. But if someone wants to come in, they're going to replace the trees anyway to the square footage it takes and the square and the inches are the same. Um is that going to be sufficient to be able to take those trees out if they choose to? as long as insurance comes back.

So, I think that there are two things at play here. Um, you're talking about the tree protection, but then also talking about the landscaping requirements. So, they would have to put back in trees based off of the existing provisions of of the landscaping code. But in terms of the tree preservation, one doesn't necessarily replace the other because that would be taking down old growth trees.

Okay. So, how do we protect them from being able to stifle a piece of property that's really good except because trees in the center? Like we just saw a development where this one area that's down below is all wooded. Right above us is a field. That guy's got a lot easier than the guy below. Um I want to make sure that these guys can actually do something with the property in there without spending a fortune on what could be all legacy trees in a sense.

And that was something that we considered when we had some of the exemptions written up. So for properties that are 5 acres or less, for those commercial properties, we understand that sighting could potentially be an issue in terms of being able to move it around those trees. So those properties would be exempt. But if it's a larger property, the understanding is that they should be able to relocate to include the trees within their overall design, but still meet the desired intentions of the space that they're designing.

So how does one go through the process? So, let's say I've got that center lot, that big lot that's 10 acres or whatever, and right in the center I get all the trees. I want to take those trees out so I can set the proper drainage and flow to go around and put the trim things around the perimeter, which I'm going to need to do it for the landscape units anyway. But is he going to get credit for that for those taking those trees down by putting more trees out and around?

Not credit necessarily, but of course, if that's something that the border like to see included, we could include that as well. But currently as it's written there isn't anything that would provide a credit for such an action.

Did it used to be written that way with someone if they were taking trees down but they were as long as they were putting back whether it was buffer or not that they get credits back.

There is planting credit that's currently within the code. Correct.

So all right. So they will get credit. So if they so they if they needed to they could just come to us say look this is affecting my site. I want to take these trees down the center. We can just allow them to go do it.

Well this would now change this because we're asking them to retain 20%. So they can still take down the trees and replace them, but we're asking them to retain 20% on the site.

All right. So how do they go through the problem not having to follow it if it's a situation like that?

One second.

David Engel, planning and economic development director. So I just wanted to clarify this was an LPA or planning commission request to institute the 20%. Their feeling is is that with the new fee structure even with the cap um it's just adjusting the pricing for inflation since 2010. So 20% kind of ensures a preservation. So there is a way of addressing it and that's through an alternative standard because preservation of trees is the standard of the code and 20%. So we would probably have an inind tree replacement on the property to accommodate uh the existing tree canopy that would have to be removed if it was a centralized commercial project.

All right. So alternative standards you got through a whole another process etc. Is there

it's done administratively and the code requires to deliver an alternative standard we have to meet or exceed the code intent. So that's the exercise that we would undertake using tree replacement on the property. Or they could ask for it at an MPD stage if they knew

right. And the board can act and appine on that at the project stage. Yes, sir.

Simultaneously,

but and I'm thinking like let's say along US 19. I've got someone who wants to come in and do something. He's going to have to take away a bunch of trees that could be the center sc. They're gone.

What do you mean

the trees in 19?

Not up in the north.

Come come see my homeless camps.

There's plenty of trees. That's where they're all hiding.

So to have someone to be able to come in there and take down those trees, I want to have the flexibility without being the overburdenly penalty where they're not going to do anything.

So commissioner, since this is first reading, uh we're going to do our homework. We will advise the board uh prior to the next hearing, the adoption hearing, when give you some alternatives.

All right. if you would take a look down that 19 corridor. to what can be done with that and then just give the mental thought about a bigger project that may have a whole clump of trees toward the center and those you've seen during drainage things when things happen with the big oak trees they get wet start all over BMA etc they collapse down they cause all sorts of troubles I want to make sure we can have proper drainage especially you know in in high high flood areas or high let's say low sea level areas

okay sir thank you

you're welcome are we talking Yeah. Go ahead, Commissioner T.

Um I I do have a problem with the the cap at 3500 because all that is is back to square zero from because we did not keep up with inflation. So I want to suggest that we up that minimum or what is it a minimum? No, up that cap and tie it to inflation so we don't have to come wait. It's horrible that we took 20 years for us or more to fix this. Um I have some photos. I would love to show you. Um Gina, did you get those?

Oh, I just I just sent you some photos. I was in Sarasota this weekend visiting my um son and I I think it was Frinkville. I know you live down there. Um driving down their roads and looking at the landscaping and I specifically I'm talking about oak trees um which provides so much benefit to to the world. Um, look look at the development on the right and and and and all the oak trees that line the road there. I mean, and they've got their drive-thrus all in there behind there. And then I think there's a few more. I think I sent four. Um, I should And this is us. This is us. We We take our They're not oak trees, I can tell you. their their head their trees cut into balls and their and their crate myrtles. And hey, I love crepe myrtles, but not like this. And if I want I challenge you when you drive home today, drive down the roads and and see what kind of canopy we have on our roads because we don't have a canopy. We've taken it all out. So, um, so that was Sarasota

and the other one is us. That's us. And it just kills me to see this. So I we got to do better with the trees. We got to put them back in. And we are I are just if you look at the new Ashley Furniture, it's their largest store in the country that they just put on 54. You know what they put in their parking lots? Crate myrtles. Great myrtles. Seriously.

So um you know what? One of our staffers called me and apologized. We know you're going to be upset, commissioner, when you see a landscaping plan, but it got approved and we let them. No trees. No trees. Um, so I want to see I want this to be as strong as it possibly can. So I want to see the the the cap higher. I want it and I want it tight for inflation. I like the 20% canopy. I think that's a great idea. And um I don't see why they're not requiring trees planted around the storm water ponds, why they're just barren deserts of trees. I showed that example the last meeting of the um the storm water ponds on on Little Road AC kind of near Pit Boss across from my church just covered with oak trees and it's lovely. And you know what? People go picnic on the stormwater pond under the oak trees. So, we need to get that back. So, I'm for as strong commissioner as we can possibly get this.

Chair,

and we're 20 years behind on

Commissioner Wman.

Thank similar um thought process as Commissioner Starky on this.

Yes. with as many

with as much industry moving to Florida and Pasco

and especially with the residential,

I view this as just basically another impact fee. And it needs to be because there's a cost to move here. And every time folks move here, that's more legacy grandfather oaks and other trees that get torn down. And there's a cost to that. You move here, you want to live in paradise. Well, you need paradise with the trees. and you know, folks want make a decision to move here. Um, they need to pay for for I'm not going to say the destruction, but the change that that's taking place when they move here. So, I'm for I'm I'm for eliminating the cap if there's an appetite for that. Um, and you know, it's just the cost of living in Pasco County and moving to Pasco County, especially if you're coming from out of state. So, we have our impact fees and it's an impact when folks move here and when they come here they're upset. Where are my We hear it all the time in our office. Where's our trees? Where's this that? Well, they got taken away because you wanted to live here. So, how do we balance that? We have to make it up somewhere and give the folks what they want. It's just going to make it a little bit more expensive. But, you know, I think with the affordability, even though the affordability is a big concept, I I think generally they can the conclusion across this county, people say, "Yeah, let's let's revitalize our oak canopy and um probably wouldn't be upset with whatever that expenses." So, thank you and thank you for your work on this. This is this is important. I personally feel I've told this carvala this will be one of the most important votes that I will ever make as a commissioner in my entire time that I'm blessed to get to do this job because the generational impacts that this will set precedent for we none of us will probably be around to see it. This is this is incredibly important not just for pass but for our environment. So thank you.

Thanks Commissioner. Um, I wanted to address the comments that you made regarding the fees as well as Commissioner Sark's comments. So, in terms of the updating of the fees, we did consider that within the draft that we currently have and we're proposing that the fees would be looked at on a three-year basis and that inflation would be included as part of the consideration as to whether or not it should be increased or not. So, that could potentially help address some of the concerns that you had regarding that. and we could definitely look in terms of increasing potentially that cap or eliminating it depending on whatever the board would like us to proceed with. We can come back with those options and discuss it at the February 17th hearing. Um I would say we did look at some of the other communities and they don't have caps. They basically have their multiplier or whatever their fee structure is higher than

and basically you pay whatever it is.

Yeah. Or or we can do it like we did with uh the fire feed where a case by case basis if there's a big fish employment wise that's looking to come here right like

or something to cover your general fund

or the tree fund. And we do also have incentives that we've proposed within here that could significantly discount the fees that would be due up to 75% of the amount that would have been due to the fund if you have those enhanced protection. So I could just go back. So, if you're preserving heritage trees, if you're preserving trees that are located within the landscape buffering and screening areas along arterials and collector roads, um if you're preserving in excess of the 20%, you have that sort of table there that says if you do 5% over, you get a 5% credit going all the way up to 15%. And then if you preserve canopy that's adjacent to open play areas, you also get a 5% um credit there because you'd be colllocating essentially the passive recreation and active recreational areas. And those credits can all be combined for a maximum credit of 75% to the total amount that would be due to the treatment

default. This wouldn't be, for example, where the areas where these heritage trees are, they've been turned into flood planes or storm water ponds. And if we have a hurricane, they drown, you know, 100 years storm. We that happened all over the county. We lost them to mother nature and then we lost them due to the development design where the trees were in the middle of storm water ponds or flood planes and we lost them that way. I don't like that model. I don't think those trees should count if they're left in a in the storm water plawn or the flood flood plane of an area. I think it's great if they stay and if mother nature happens, she happens, but I don't think those should count towards because as we've seen towards towards the credit because as we've seen, you know, Florida happened and many of them drowned and they're just falling over laying in a ditch now. So, it's understand the gamesmanship there and why it's done, but I think we need to take that off.

But, Commissioner Waitman, are you

Mr. Sty,

I I have a question on his question. If you say um I mean, if there's an existing pond that has a tree in it,

look at connected city on 52 all along there where the water came up on the south side of 52 coming east. So, be on your right if you're coming in this building. You'll see in there there's oak trees, pines, others. And this is where all the overflow water goes. And those trees drown. They were left there. They were great. As long as it wasn't oversaturated. It was fine. But nature happened. And now those oak trees, they're all drowned. They're

But they're not going to But I think a tree that comes down for whatever mother nature causes.

We cause that man change the terrain, we cause that problem. Okay. What what I don't what I'm hoping you're not saying is when an engineer designs a subdivision and um this is where a pond is supposed to be, but that's where a tree is, then that tree doesn't count. Well, then we've just taken apart what we just tried to do is preserve trees. They need to design. They need to be sight

uh they need to have a site context when they design their neighborhood so they don't take out the heritage. No, I think you're talking I'm meaning it doesn't count towards their

I'm I'm meaning the same thing that you're meaning. I'm just saying a different way.

Okay.

I if I may. Yeah. What I think what Commissioner Weightman is saying is if they design it so that all their preserved trees are within the flood plane uh the the the the preservation area for the flood plane for the development that they wouldn't count as preserved trees because at some point they will come they will they will get flooded and they will they will die. So, okay.

All right. Commissioner Jagger,

do you have a slide where it shows where we are with the other like compared to Hillsboro Penllis and can you

I do um do you mind if I just um address the comment that Commissioner Sarin Waitman were making before? Okay. So, we did attempt to address that concern in the language as well. So um essentially we are requiring that the trees that are preserved are in locations that the changes in elevation will not result in them being flooded. And if that so happens that that's the only place that you can put it that you would have to install the necessary drainage to prevent the trees from actually flooding and ensure that that storm water is taken away.

Does that sufficiently address a concern or would you like us

what we were talking about moving larger trees? Okay. What did you say? If I can read it specifically. So, um, for all sites subjects to the provisions of section 802.4 of this code, a note shall be included on the plan set verifying that the proposed areas for tree canopy preservation are not within portions of the site subject to flooding resulting from elevation changes caused by a field. And if it is located in those areas, then you would have to install the necessary drainage to mitigate flooding.

Yeah. And um, what I'm what the picture that Oh, never mind. It's a picture on my iPad. Did you get it up? Um, there's two of them. These are the oak trees that are are on the storm water pond on the little road.

And there they are there, too. And it's lovely. They surrounded the storm water ponds with oak trees.

That's nice. Yeah.

Okay.

Gina, have you got my picture yet?

Yes.

So, can we get my slide?

I'm sorry. Go ahead. Thanks.

The comparison slide.

Yeah. Since we're talking about fees, I just want to see where we are.

Just cuz I'm on the end, you can't forget about me.

I called you, but I don't know what happened. Something happened in between us. Something named Sharky. Oh,

she So this is what our fees look like right now. So from 2005 to 2025 we were at $50 per inch. The maximum applicable fees varied based off of the land use whether it was residential or not or there was a structure on it and regulated trees have remained constant. Under resolution number 25-291 for which the fees are not yet in effect but the board has adopted the resolution that approved this. Uh the fees are $75 per inch for the regulated trees and $150 per inch for heritage trees. As a reminder, the heritage trees are live oaks that are 24 in and greater. Sorry, live oaks that are 34 in and greater and southern magnolia that are 24 in and greater. And then this is the proposed amended resolution that includes that $3,500 per upland developable acre. And Commissioner Jagger, to answer your question, this is a table here that has a comparison for some of the communities that we looked at, specifically Hillsboro County, Panelis County, Elatchua County, and Bvard County. Their fee structures are all a little bit different, but um in terms of the payment in lie of uh replacing the trees, Hillsboro is at $65 per inch. Um those fees were last updated in 2011. It was actually $100 before per inch and they decreased it with the onset of the economic downturn around that time. Panel is at $379 per tree. Uh Elatchro is at $135 per inch. And Brevard has a formula depending on whether or not the number of trees that are removed are known or not. So essentially you multiply the number of trees removed times 400 plus the total number of inches removed times 120. And then if the inches aren't known, then you would do the number of trees removed times $3,000. And then if that none of it's known, then it would be $60,000 per acre. And that was back in 2006 updated theirs.

What's the approximate age of the oak trees that reach the heritage standard?

That is a good question that I don't have details on. I do know in terms of the mature spread that those are basically about uh 60 to 120 um feet in width. Um but in terms of the age I I don't have those details. I can find out and get back to you. I don't believe our arborist is here today to speak to it more specifically. Um Jackie, do you know?

I can get that information.

You can share with us all.

Commissioner, are you good? Yeah. I just wanted to

hang on.

See that? Uh, Gene, do you have my picture I was showing up?

So, this is taken down at uh on my way to Fort Myers Beach and hurricane in 2022. And you see the tree there along the rightway that you want to see out there in a major storm event that came through between wind and water. Everything along the whole road. I got videos going all the way down. That's a commonplace thing. Sometimes they take a sidewalk, sometimes not. But if you put them along those roadways all the way down, you're you're going to be facing that especially on the west side or even maybe along some riverbed we don't. So you got to be careful what you want. And and when we were to see see the governor out of Betmar right out there taking a picture, remember all those trees that were down. If you put too many of them out there, it's going to be trouble depending on where you put them along roadways, etc. So we had roadways we had to go around because the roadways were blocked by over trees. So, you got to be careful what you're looking for. And I will tell you along the coast, as far as 19 goes, oak trees, they'll tell you the tanic acid from the from the leaves contaminate the water. They're bad for the water. They shouldn't be pushing any of those things alongside. Another thing you mentioned uh about how you didn't like those crepe myrtles in front of Ashley Furniture.

No.

I will tell you, Rooms to Go years ago when they were looking at doing the landscaping or not, uh staff gave him permission to put the crate murdles out there. They look great and you could still see the building still got a thing an incentive where it looked better than it was.

They look great in the summer, but how do they look in the winter?

Uh, these ones here look pretty good.

All right. So, maybe it's a different type of tree, but it's a flowering tree that was there that looks good all the time that allow them to see their business because they didn't want to have the big oak trees that sometimes block out everything. So, I want to have flexibility on on those trees, too.

Um, I have a question.

Commissioner Stark. Um, I want to be sure that we don't have what happened on um, South Word's property. And I think it it's happened on some other properties. Um, especially if we're up in the price on the trees that they're not clearcut before sold to a developer. Um, I is David David's here somewhere.

Angel

over there. No, I'm sorry. David Goldstein. We worked on some language to strengthen that, but I I just want to be sure that um we have that we're you know,

we can't stop there.

There's some things we can do. I want I want to go over that.

I don't think we've changed our language.

I thought you add you added something to it after Southwork,

but I think it's working.

Yeah. So, do you mind explaining what the rules are? Patrick may be able.

Oh, do you know them?

Because I thought David didn't.

Well, I I was just gonna say we I I call those David's rules and I we didn't touch them. Uh you see what David Goldstein writes, we just leave alone. So,

there there there is a provision that you can't clearcut and then come in for an MPU at within 3 years or something. We borrowed some language from Manatee County um about

basically

a window in front of devel of rezoning.

You can't clear cut under an egg exemption and then immediately come in for development. You basically have to

wait either 5 years or 5 years before you can come in for development. If you're clear cutting under a exemption, you still if you're doing legitimate a operation,

right? You can still remove trees, but you what you can't what we the loophole that we removed was that you that we had developers that were clear cutting under an egg exemption and then immediately turning around and filing an application for development.

Right.

So, that loophole has been removed and as far as I know, it's working. I asked staff if it's working and the answer I got back is that it's still working.

I I want to be be sure because, you know, he took out oak trees saying he needed more space for his cattle. which we know

south. Yes, he did. He took them out down by the trail. I could have had we could have had trees on the

Is that off 52?

Um is on 52 next to the um the traitor's property. Took out all those oak trees down there

and you know why the trees down?

Be clear if somebody

needed space for cattle when we talked.

If somebody did something before we changed the rules, I can't stop.

I laugh too because I'm cattle rancher. If somebody did something before we changed the rules, we can't retroactively stop that. But

my understanding is that since we changed the rules, that doesn't happen anymore.

Yeah, I'm just wanting to bring it up so I make sure our staff knows that and looks for that. Um I don't

if Patrick tells me it's still happening, we'll have to look at it again.

Well, do they even look?

He has to tell me that it's still happening.

Do you look to see if the land changed to graphically? Um we are again we don't we're not aware of every single piece of property in the county and what trees they take out when but of the applications we've seen we've never come across this issue since then most of these large developments they're pretty well aware of them up front right the vast majority of large developments are MPUDS these days um so we we haven't seen this issue since that language

I think a way to fix that is as part of the application process they have to show a aial shot of their property, right? Um then that's not hard to do. to just go on Google Earth and

time stamp of

there was one change that we did make was that

or we're taking we are taking those

I think there was one change that we did make which is there are some folks that are proceeding under an a exemption

and they weren't telling us that they were proceeding under an egg exemption and that we were citing them in a code enforcement action. We've changed the code to make clear they have to notify us if they're proceeding under an a exemption because they weren't previously doing that. That's been added to this change to the code.

Do you feel the penalty is strong enough to um not do us oops sorry just find me. I it needs to be stronger than if they have behaved under the ordinance.

That's a question I'm going to defer to our code enforcement folks because I

Okay. So we don't need to be a parent not state.

That's a

that can be discussed next week too or whatever. So

that's a

they can re research that.

Um but I what they told me is the issue right now is that they weren't getting notice that they were proceeding under that exemption. So but now we will we should get notice.

Okay. I just want to make sure.

All right. Any other question of staff on the tree ordinance? Uh there's going to be no action required today anyway. public comment.

Public comment. Okay.

So, I did have a couple more slides.

Okay. Let's go.

To go through.

All righty. So, like I mentioned, this is related to the tree mitigation fund. Um, essentially after the adoption of resolution number 25-291, there have been some discussions regarding some proposed amendments to that resolution. Um, and I want to run through those with you and um to kindly solicit your feedback as to what you would like us to change and what you would like us to leave as is. So, got slides right.

I don't I don't know that it should be um No, I don't know. I 3500 is too low for me. Whether there's no cap, I don't know.

They'll just pay.

Well, it needs to be higher than you know.

Do you have a list of like the other counties? Like you've seen it before.

They don't have caps.

No, there's no caps,

but they have a higher fee.

They go out and inspect the trees before they go. You're allowed to even start.

We could work on some numbers and bring that back to you at the next hearing for your consideration.

I would be chairman. Go ahead.

I think based on at least Well, I'm gathering for the after the board is there's probably a whole section

come up with an alternative with the no cap or CPI or something or combination there.

I think it's I think collectively we probably moved away from this seemingly.

Okay.

Well, let me give you a little help, I guess. So if you look at 150 an inch, if you have an oak tree that's 64 in, that's 9,600 bucks.

So it costs to move here.

Guess what? You wonder why you're getting clearcut? There you go.

But keep in mind if if you try to go by inch by inch, you're going to measure all them trees and go through all that. That's going to put a lot of time and money. And then you got to try to verify it. How much time you want to spend on this? The goal is to save them. Yeah. And to incentivize and inspire projects to save them.

Folks, it's not stopping people from moving here. Folks are still going to keep coming in in droves, changing the terrain every day.

They want their cake. They want their cake and eat it, too. They want their trees, but the trees have to be gone because they have their house. So, you know,

it's a quagmire honestly.

I have a couple more slides.

So, um for the removal of the definition of the heritage tree, the reason why we're proposing this is because the definition is going to be moved to appendix A of the LDC. Um we're the cap we are going to go ahead and do that additional research as you've instructed us. Um, we are proposing the addition of landscaping plants on county property and this is to align with internal stakeholders and existing county operations. We are also proposing the uh reimbursement for irrigation, landscaping design, mulching and repairs. However, the expenditures shall not exceed 50% of the total funds that are used in the previous fiscal year for the planting and per purchasing and planting of canopy trees. So essentially, the more that you plant in the previous year, the more that you're able to use towards those maintenance costs in the first in the following year. Would you go back to the previous slide? I'm sorry. Okay. And then lastly, we updated the language related to the existing allowed expenditure for the county's tree management plan to allow for countywide canopy studies instead of only ones on county owned or maintained property. Um, for a couple reasons, but mainly it helps us to identify areas for tree giveaways. And it's consistent with doing a jurisdiction wise county um canopy study versus doing it just on parcels owned by the county.

That's what that means.

Okay. I just figured out what this No one else puts a cap on anything.

Well, what's your need?

That's why I wanted to see that. You guys are getting a copy as well.

So, you want to do Canopy Studies Countywide,

correct? The cost is not more than doing it on individual properties. And you get a better insight as to where the county may be lacking trees so that in the event that you want to do tree giveaways, which we do, you could target them in areas that are showing as needing additional canopy.

I I think we're going to spend money we need to spend. I I mean, I want to I want to allow the county to go put them in all their properties, put the irrigation in so it's all good. So they because they got to get irrigation if they're going to stay and live. so expensive to try to go and water them and have watering conditions done. So, uh, long as that's in there, I don't need any canopy studies. If the staff's got a building, something they're building, every one of these should be offset with the cost of the stream mitigation fund, put them in. Any things to be retrofitted or improved for different changes, allow it to be done, save the taxpayer money, get the money back out there, and put more trees in the ground, which is this is all supposed to do. If we're supposed to go put trees in the ground, let's just go do it and free it up. Yeah, study's pretty bureaucratic.

Um, other counties require irrigation. We don't. I'm thinking we should maybe be looking at that. I would like to know what c what other cabins require when they do their landscaping. Um because a lot of our stuff looks like garbage because we don't require irrigation anymore.

Yeah. Uh Patrick Dar delu. Um we do have irrigation in our land development code. Um I don't happen to be the subject matter expert because that's normally handed handled with the building permit applications because that's when the plumbing plans come in. Um so we do have an irrigation code. Um I just I don't know it off the top of my head. Now maybe it's not as broad as we need it to be. Maybe we need to look into some changes to it, but

like to look at that just make sure we're not throwing good good money off the bat if there's no irrigation.

Well, again, that's why you want to allow the the irrigation to be in part of part of when the county does a project to allow them to go put in because otherwise they will die.

I guess we're leaving it in. Mike,

put our put our inmates to use. Give them some cans and they

uh you might spend more money on that later.

Give them some exercise.

All right. All right. Anything more on this ordinance?

We'll see it again.

Public comment. Anyone from the public want to talk to us?

We we have several signed up.

Okay.

Uh Julia Bartonic. Julia Abartunic 2645 Meadowwood Tribe New Cori and this is current comment that I'd like to submit for the record. Uh first and foremost leave in the nine preferred preferred native tree species listed in the current ordinance. They were reduced to four by the county and the planning council has stricken them all out. Under the resolution section 802 whereas section please add whereas to include best practices for tree preservation be deployed back slashassessed and documented under section two authorized locations and recipients add quote public and private properties along waterways streams drainage and channels think Hela and Milton 802 2.4 to tree canopy standards leave-in not stricken out quote is often a necessary and preferred alternative under tree inventory and existing canopy calculation to leave in ISA certified arborist and remove licensed landscape architect if keeping licensed landscape architect leave in the word registered three under tree plan leave and all that was put in by the Pasco County Planning Department and stricken by the planning commission especially leave for live oak which is drought tolerant by the way quirkus Virginiaana um which is our southern live oak most of our native species are drought tolerant drought tolerant um under 802.7 tree replacement standards and mitigation a general replacement standards for developments. Um we want the list of nine native species left in as replacement species. Um, and also we want uh we want the cap. Now it would be ideal to remove the cap, but if the cap is there, we want everyone to be more generous to Pasco County to beautiful Pasco. And uh we would want to increase that to $10,000 per acre. And um the hashtags are preserve Pasco and resilient Pasco. Thank you. I'd like to submit this. Mr. Chairman,

I was going to ask you have a motion receive file approval.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Thank you.

Um I'm curious what trees were taken out.

Next person up public comment.

Uh Nancy Hazelwood.

Do we have a list of what trees were?

Can you send me a list of what what trees we're taking? Nancy Hazwood 341101101. A nice place. I'm going to get a recording of that and just push a button. Been up here so much today. Well, thank you all everybody for working on the tree ordinance. I know this has been a long process and everybody's been very thoughtful on all of it. Um, but I do have a couple of suggestions. Uh some of the same she just said like upland mitigation amount could be raised to 10,000 an acre. Also the same thing more native species of trees need to be included in this ordinance. uh commercial sites under five acres and minor rural subdivisions which could be re used in the northeast rural area plan a lot have been exempted from the tree ordinance. So, I I'm not seeing that as a good thing in northeast rural. Um, they could come in and clear quite a bit of land with under that. And also uh the the the trees on the commercial sites that are exempt under five acres, you're going to have a just parking lots of superheated asphalt without those trees in it. And we've already got huge amounts of heat coming off that stuff. So, if you could include trees in that, no matter how big it is, maybe you want to do a reduced amount or something, but we need all the trees. And please do not exempt um MRS in the northeast rural area plan. Thank you.

Nancy, do you want to submit that those comments? Okay. Well, I I do want to get an answer on why we're um

We'll get it after we want to keep public comment going though.

Jasmina for y'all.

And who's after that?

Uh we've got one online. We've got two others.

Okay.

Hi. Um Jasmine for King. Uh I live in Clear Water, 100 Hampton Road. Um I had 10 acres in Hudson. I um worked with Chairman Mariano on regional transit years ago. That didn't happen. But I agree with um Miss U Starky about uh cutting so many trees unnecessarily. I think we uh are doing so much of cutting. It's all bulldozed all up and down the little road and Hudson Avenue between Hicks and Hayes. Every day I go up there. I I see another 10 acres or 40 acres cut to absolutely bulldozed over. We used to treat trees as um resources. Now we treat them like trash. They don't even mulch them anymore to give mulch, free mulch. They burn them down. tree on this planet is cleaning the air and burnt tree is adding to the pollution of the air. So I believe that you should preserve every tree possible and the developer should be working around the clump of trees, not bringing up the the planes that don't coincide with the plot they bought. Um they cut at least seven um big trees to create a dry dry pond. It's all straight. I was trying to work with them and ask him to work around the trees and save those ancient trees and still have enough um space to collect rain water in a rainy season. No, they didn't. They just cut everything straight. 660 ft of straight ditch that looks so ugly and all the good trees are gone. So those trees would never fall on anybody's house because they're in an easement. They should have saved them instead of cut them down. Um if the tree falls down on an existing house, there is insurance that covers it. So I believe that we should take the cap off and they should pay for every tree or bring the cap out to $10,000 or whichever is the greater because we cannot sustain environment in Pasco County at this pace. So please uh respect the trees who they are and save them. This is what's happening on a little road. Every day I go up the trees are gone, bulldozed over and this is what they replacing them with. These trees will never be viable um in 20 years. And these trees are not native trees. They are decorative hybrids that do nothing for environment.

Can I Can I move to accept those pictures?

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Do you want to give those pictures to us?

Okay. Bring them to the clerk.

Over to there to the clerk.

That's okay. I I asked I asked.

No, they got to go to the clerk.

Oh, they do.

Yeah.

Sydney buckle record.

You can look at them, but I mean

so we'll pass them over.

Say it again.

Okay.

All right. Thank you.

She used to come all the time. I can't see her.

Cindy Buckle, 5938 Frontier Drive, Zephr Hills, Florida, and I am talking about the trees. Um, I agree that either there be no cap or a cap of a minimum of $10,000. Um, personally, I mean, I have these pictures I can give to you. Um, that clearly shows how these trees were here one day and the next day they were gone, bulldozed down. Um, crepe myrtles are not native to Florida. They are from Asia, Korea. They are not a native tree. They are deciduous, which means in the winter time they lose all of their color and they're normally hatracked, which means they're cut off. Um the oak trees that um were cut down were trees that were at least 50 to 75 years old. Um they were attempted to be burned, but we were under a burn ban and I was quite clear several times to let them know that should they be put on fire that a fire department would be called. But at any rate, the new phase two has little tiny shrubs. Um, my concern is there's no canopies. I sent you a picture of canopy cuz as I drive I think of you and I appreciate the fact that you appreciate trees. But these small trees we will never see grow to be 50 or 60 years old. Um, and it's time for the developers to be able to build around the trees. I live in a 2400 square foot home. That house was built so with minimum tree loss. I have trees in the front, on the side, and I have a complete wooded acre in the back. And trees that die, if I have to cut them, I plant three more trees. The other thing that you need to consider are pine trees because eagles roost in pine trees, much like the one in Lake Jvida that was taken down with two live eaglets in it, and nothing was ever done about it. Um, I have pictures and videos of that. I know people who live there. So, we need to concentrate on live oaks. We do need pines. A lot of people don't like them, but if we want our eagles to come back, we need them. But at any rate, I would like to see no cap at all because a developer could basically go in and clear cut every single tree for $3,500. That makes no sense to me at all.

Thank you.

But if you want these pictures, you can have them.

Uh motion bring it to the to the clerk.

Do you have a motion receive file?

Second. I make that motion.

You have a second.

Second.

Wait, am I second?

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, you can't do that.

I need a second.

All in favor say I. I.

Thank you.

All right. The last one's online.

Uh yes, that's the last that is signed up. Okay.

Here.

Anyone else here to speak to the tree ordinance? We're going to close.

No, no, no, you can't.

All right. So, no one else from the audience. We're going to close public comment here. And we have one online. Yes.

Thank you,

Katherine Capello.

Good afternoon. My name is Katherine Capello. I live at 6646 Timber Lane in Newport Richie 34 653. And it's great to hear everyone in agreement that the the existing cap of 3500 is way too low. I definitely would vote for a no cap as well. Um trees do enhance property value and aesthetics in neighborhoods. They have the ability to clean the air, filter the water. They offer wildlife natural habitat. Insects, birds, and woodland creatures need their habitat. And it's wrong the way we keep taking away their homes and food. Um, trees are natural buffers to hurricanes and they help fight climate shifts. Choked up. Sorry. As a result of pass as resident of Pasc County, I truly appreciate the wildlife, the trees, the waterways, its importance to preserve natural Florida ecosystems. Is there a point where we can say no more? Open up vision to see ways to house everyone using what we have already land that's already cleared like empty strip malls or existing real estate. Pasco County is the home of open spaces and vibrant places not crowded spaces. We are stewards with the help of this land and the waterways. I definitely recommend no cat and I'd like to invite you all to celebrate Arbor Day in Newport Richie. We're a designated tree city and on January 16th we'll be at Francis Park from 10 to 11 celebrating trees and planting one. All right, I appreciate everyone before me and thank you.

Thank you. That'll close public comment. Um, any other comments for the board? There's no action needed today.

Commissioner Sarki, I just wanted to clarify the item that you had regarding um the live oak being removed from the public comment. Essentially, what we did there is that instead of the previous language that listed live oak, we included heritage trees. and heritage trees as would be defined by the code includes live oak and southern magnolia. For the live oak, they're 24 in 34 inches and larger and southern magnolia 34 inches and larger.

Yeah. And um to your point about trees get knocked over. My understanding is live oaks right don't it's not they don't how do I say this? There are other kind of oaks that easily fall over but live oaks are very sturdy.

Yes. But so what you may be looking at could be a turkey oak or a water oak, not a live oak.

And then I just wanted

500 a live oak supports 500 different species. A crate myrtle supports

two just like the second

fly mosquito.

Mr. County attorney.

The second second hearing will be held on February 17th, 2026 at 1:30 or soon thereafter at St. may be heard in Newport Richie.

Okay.

And then I just wanted to really quickly just summarize the things that you wanted the staff to look at and bring back on the 17th. So, um we are going to be putting the fees in the resolution. You're going to look at large commercial developments with trees potentially located within the center of the site and how to accommodate that. Um we are going to consider the option to eliminate the cap and what that would look like. Um, we are also going to get you some more information, Commissioner Mariano, regarding the oge of the age of the oak trees. Um, mature oak trees.

All the All the heritage trees.

All the heritage trees. Okay.

But I did you say I thought we said no to the fees in the resolution. Is that what did you say?

Oh, in the ordinance. Sorry. Okay.

Yeah, there will be in the resolution, not in the ordinance.

Not in ordinance.

Correct. That's why I'm doing this. Okay. Um, and then also, uh, let's see what other county what other counties require for irrigation in their ordinances. Is there anything else? Oh, and remove the countywide canopy um, studies that we were proposing for the resolution.

I don't know. Um, that countywide canopy, isn't that something that could be done by that? There's companies that do that pretty easily with technology that fly over. So it's not it's not anything that won't burn.

What what do you plan to do with the study when you get it?

That's what I previously mentioned.

Then go tell us what trees.

Yes. Correct.

We already know that we've if a county project comes in, we can go put all the trees they want to put in.

Yeah.

And bring it forward. So if that's where we're limiting it to, then I don't see the point of spending the money on that.

We have we have fly over, don't we, from the storms of before and after that we can use that's

just done. We can see real, you know, we have the data pretty much, but before this

Yeah.

Yeah. I don't know what what's entailed in the tree survey, but you know, we do more frequent errors.

I I just don't see I I don't see how you're going to implement what you've got. You're going to look at a project, it's going to come through, we're going to put a plan in, either prove it or we don't. And you've got the flexibility to just get those done. So why why throw more stuff in the process?

Put all the trees you want in, Mike. That's it for me.

Move.

And remember about the tree as far as development goes. If there's a section of trees that are in the center, correct?

How we can look at trying to

That was her number one.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you.

All right. Um, now we're going to proceed with the public hearings. Uh, we did do 67 already.

Do you want to review the procedures?

We did that earlier today.

We did that. All right. That's good. and we swore in. So, we're at 64, the bond financing for the solid waste disposal and resource recovery facility. Okay.

And we approve a publication.

Can we have an abbreviated um

I mean, come on. We're going to approve it. So,

yes. Thank you.

It's only

Good afternoon, commissioners. Happy New Year.

What's 95?

Let me get it of record. Uh we have proof of publication Tampa Bay Times December 17, 2025 edition.

Okay. Good afternoon, commissioners. Happy new year. Tracy overur public infrastructure fiscal and business administration interimm director. We have a resolution uh authorizing the issuance in one or more series of not to exceed $95 million aggregate principal amount of solid waste disposal and resource recovery system revenue bonds series 2026A AMT and solid waste disposal and recovery system revenue bonds series 2026B AMT of the county to finance and or reimburse all or part portion of the acquisition and or construction of equipment addition s extensions, improvements, and reconstruction of the solid waste disposal and resource recovery system and to pay the cost of issuance, appointing the trustee, bond registar, and paying agent, and approving the form of and authorizing the execution and delivery of a master trust indenture and first supplemental indenture, making certain covenants and agreements in connection herewith, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. Move to approve.

You can't.

Why?

Public hearing item.

Okay. A little background. The solid ways.

So she they're they're not interested in the president.

None. Okay.

We have no one sign.

You're not running the meeting.

Does anyone want to hear a presentation from the board or just move on?

Okay.

We have no one signed up in advance.

No one signed up. All right. Do we have a motion? It's a public hearing.

It's public hearing.

Anybody from the public here to speak to this item?

This is a TER hearing under under federal

uh tax code. Public has an opportunity to speak to the to the project and to the financing.

Anyone signed up for this item?

No.

Anyone here from the audience want to speak to it?

We close public hearing.

Approve.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. P65. We approve publication in the November 5th, 2025 edition of the Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. This is on consent.

We do just a moment, please. We do not have anyone signed up for this one.

Okay. No, this is consent right now.

No, no, it's the chair just has to call. We have five consent items coming.

Okay. Just have

four call for whether or not there is anybody who is objecting to this item.

Right.

Yeah.

All right. Amy Tol, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Item P65 is PTE26-CO2. It's a conditional use request in the name of 1884 Robert Aberisque T-Mobile South LLC for a 155 foot above ground level AGL closed mount monipole wireless communications facility WCF in an AR agricultural residential district located east central in east central Pastor County on the north side of Simmons Road approximately 1,360 ft west of the intersection of Simmons Road and 14 code. This comes with your recommendation of approval with conditions.

Okay. Is there any here to speak in opposition to P65? Seeing no one leave it on consent. B66.

We approve publication Tampa Bay Times November 26, 2025 and supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings to site postings.

P66 is PTE26-000024. It's a comprehensive plan amendment in the name of CPA 252 North Pasco Resort providing for transmitt of the comprehensive plan text amendment to sub area policy flu 7.1.63 North Pasco Resort. This comes with your with a recommendation of approval.

We have two people signed up for this matter.

Okay, we're going to pull that off consent. We're going to move to item P68. B68, we have proof of publication November 26, 2025, Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site posting.

Item P68 is PTE 26-7900. It's a zoning amendment in the name of R and S Properties, FLA LLC, Bell Haven. It's a change in zoning from an expired MPD master plan unit development district to an R2 lowdensity residential district located in south central Pasco County at the intersection of Bell Lake Road and Peace Peaceful Lane Road containing approximately 5.53 acres. Uh this item comes with you with a recommendation to approve.

Okay. Is anyone here to speak in opposition at item P68?

We have no one signed on and we'll leave it on consent. T69

approve publication Tampa Bay Times November 5th, 2025 supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

Item P69 is PTE26-7853. It's a substantial modification to Evans G2 MPUD in the name of Evans Property Inc. It's a substantial modification to the Evans G2 MPD to increase the total residential dwelling units from 117 to 350 on approximately 37.45 acres located in the village of Pasadena Hills within village G at the southwest corner of the intersection of Kefir Road and Handcart Road. This comes with you uh comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions. I would like to make note uh the packet that you have on record that was published did not include two conditions that were added um during the LPA version. Those were sent to the uh clerk's office for for updating.

Okay.

Um I have questions on this one.

So we're going to pull it from consent. Yes.

Okay. I'm going to pull that from consent.

Okay. So the other consent items we have a motion to approve. I make that motion.

Yes.

Motion to second. All in favor say I. I.

I.

Okay.

So, we got item P66.

All right. Um, so P66 is the comprehensive plan amendment for the North Pasco RV um with a companion on P71. Not sure if you want to do it right now or later. Um but P71 is looking to continue the item to match the transmitt or the adoption date of the comprehensive plan amendment. However, the applicant has requested that we do um include the MPD presentation with the comp plan presentation as well at this time.

Okay. So, we're going to be continuing this item, but the people that are here, if they want to speak to it now, they can or they can wait till we have the full public hearing.

And the continuence is just for the reasonzoning, not the comp plan. Okay. So, who the two people?

Yes.

Uh Nancy Hazelwood.

Do you want to wait or or speak?

Well, she when it comes up.

She's got to if she wants to speak to the comp plan amendment, she's got to do it now. Okay.

Oh,

sorry. I was out. So this so the applicant has requested the comprehensive plan amendment and the zoning be taken up in the same hearing. However, the however the zoning is not going to be acted on today. So but the comp plan amendment is so you have three minutes to talk about the comp plan amendment. If you wish to talk about the zoning amendment, you wave your time at the next hearing. So I would advise you just talk about the comprehensive plan amendment

next time.

But you but you can talk about the comprehensive plan amendment. It the board will be taking action on it today. You don't want to do that. You understand your comprehensive plan is going to be voted on today. The only time to speak on the comprehensive plan is right now.

The the zoning separate. So if you sign Yeah. If you signed up for it because you didn't didn't like like it or have comments on, I would I would throw them all into the comprehensive plan amendment like most people usually do.

Okay. So, N's going to come forward.

All right. So,

all right. So, we're going to take public comment.

Team, clear the podium.

I'm here. Nancy Hazwood at 3411. A nice place. Um, my biggest problem with this whole thing is the height of the hotel and the entertainment area that I have seen nothing about and don't know anything about. Think of it this way. This is a destination site. Your target people are snowbirds and they're coming in in November and they're staying till springtime and they've got to entertain them. You're in the northeast area plan and it specifically says that you aren't supposed to do anything to jeopardize the northeast areas community, the environment, everything. And you've got this entertainment site that they aren't telling us about and we don't know anything about and I want to know something about it before it's voted in. You know, it might be perfectly okay if you put it in a building or if you don't have amplification going on, but that's might be one.

Okay.

Thank you.

And the next person for P66.

Wow. Crazy

J Hoster.

James Hoster. My residence is 4912 Sunset Boulevard in in Port Richie, but I own property immediately. uh uh to the north of the project. My concern is this. Uh, you you re reduced some of the u the excuse me. Uh, you you reduce uh some of the u uh the spaces for the for the uh uh for both the yurts and for the the RV home uh the RV sites uh to to balance out the the trip generation for the for the hotel. But there but there's a significant difference there. Let's face it. The the the basically the RV s the RV project was designed to be kind of temporary housing. Uh people come and they stay for a period of time. Snowbirds came for the season so forth. They don't leave during the peak hours or they don't arrive during the peak hours. They particularly avoid the peak hours. And also the amenities on the site are attractive to them. The hotel is neither of those things. They they arrive in the peak in the PM peak hour and they and they leave in the AM peak hour and they and they where you've already got major traffic problems. This exacerbates them. They thereally there really isn't for a hotel site. This isn't a major destination. The only thing around is is Snow Mountain and that really hardly qualifies. uh all the all the major destinations for uh for that uh are are around uh Disney and and uh the Orlando area and even and even uh Legoland has hotels around it. They are they all have hotels in their immediate area. So, this is just a pass through hotel uh creating the problem in a in a different location. And uh these are this is a much more severe uh impact on the community than it was when it was when you were just dealing with with RV RVs and yours. And I I think you need to be made aware of that. This is not an improvement. This is a this is a a deterioration in the project. Do you have any questions?

We don't ask questions.

Thank you.

All right. Amy, you want to come back up? I could go after that.

Sure.

You want me to sign up?

Is there is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak to this item?

And there's no one online. So, we're going to close public comment and Amy, if you want to address what you just heard and then we'll let the applicant speak.

Yeah. Um, so just two highlights. Uh the height is 100 is 55 ft. Uh the reason why it's 55 ft is because uh North Pasco and the North Pasco um I'm sorry, excuse me, northeast rural area uh does not have a height limitation, a restriction for non-residential uses. So it does default to the code in that scenario, but it is uh capped at 55 ft. And um the RV resorts, those are going to be 180 day. So they are going to be seasonal like you had mentioned.

Okay. What about the the entertainment part?

The entertainment part. Entertainment.

All right. Would you like to speak?

All right. Thank you.

And Barbara Will height 6327 Grand Boulevard. You've had to hear me coughing this whole day, so I might as well get up here and talk to you all for the applicant. Um the couple questions with regard to the uh entertainment area. I I never understand where that's coming from. This is resorts. You can see from the binding concept plan that it's an integrated resort. This isn't just a hotel by the interstate. We did a binding concept plan and and had a lot of thoughtfulness in how we did that and it's you can see the amenities integrated. So, the conversation about this being some separate hotel and an RV um resort is not correct regarding in the entertainment area. I don't know what that refers to. Um but I did include a condition. We're not here in the MPD MPD today, but I'm glad it's for you in your packet so you can have all the information because I think it's important for the board to have all the information. So, I pushed for you to have all the information for you today and it's fine that you don't hear or act on the MPD. That's fine with me. But I did include a condition in the MPD that said, because I kept getting this question, um, any outdoor entertainment area should be limited to resort guests and restaurant bar patrons only. There shall be no stage lighting that creates light spill or glare off site, and the project shall comply with your noise ordinance. So, I think that covers who, how, and um, and noise. The the hotel is 55 ft. The height limit is 55 ft. Not only did we put a limit on it, we imposed that limit on it, we also agreed to a setback from the Lake Iola rightaway of 274 ft. And we have a substantial buffer, the same buffer that we had before. Um, Lake Iola quarter buffer was substantial that we have in there as well. So, a lot of thoughtfulness went into restricting our height as well as how far we were set back from Lake Iola and the quarter buffer that goes in between along Lake Iola. Now, Barb, I thought we did mention when we heard this the first time that we you did talk about entertainment be going on there. I thought it would be pretty close to where E would be. Is that still planned that way or

I can't. It's the primary resort lodge is what you're what to

exactly in that area

where there we have our pools, we have outdoor bars, we have those types of things. We anticipate that there will be entertainment.

There will be a music that you can go and listen to. Um it is well set into this site. Your noise ordinance applies. I mean I tried to write a very specific condition as to who how you know that area would operate. I can tell you that I was ever asked this question for Saddlebrook and any other resort I've ever worked on. Um because it just is something you have normally at the resort. You have I know I go to resorts and I listen to outdoor music. So I don't think it's a thing. I think it's just something that would accompany the resort.

I just want to add something. Uh the hotel the hotel itself is different than your normal hotel that you'll see in other places. This is an extended living hotel. This a hotel that someone would come in and they may stay 6 months and then they go back home. That's the way this hotel's built. And it's got kitchenets in it for people to stay longer. It also has I believe a doesn't have a lazy river.

Yeah, the the lazy river that they have for all the residents that are staying there.

Yeah, it does. It does have quite

but it's not your hotel that's going to actually you're going to come in and stay the night and leave the next morning. is the extended li living hotel. So it expands.

Yeah, the setup is we this has been this is being added to the resort to complement the resort. So

I think you have three votes.

What was that?

I think you have three votes.

I just want to say I look at this as a

important that this get explained

to approve

and I you know we we added the the hotel so there' be another place for

All in favor say I.

I.

Good job Barbara. And just for clarification for the record, that was for authorized transmitt of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment to the Department of Commerce and other reviewing agencies.

Thank you. Okay. Item P68.

P6. We've already given proof on this.

Uh you were 69.

Which one?

We are at 66.

Do we want to make an 69? It is 69. Sorry. 68 was done. Yeah. Okay. 68. This is the one start pulled. Do we want to go ahead and take action on P71 for the continuence?

Um, let's hear from Commissioner Striker. We just keep on rolling.

Well, why don't you do the continuence for Barbara's other prizing? All right. Okay. Do you have a time certain?

Yes. U March 10th at 1:30.

Move to continue March 10th 1:30.

Second.

All in favor for P71.

Continue.

I I

Okay. Any opposed?

All right. That's good. back 1669. Commissioner Stark, you pulled it.

Yeah, I did. Um I'm trying to um understand this plan. Um if you could start at this map.

Yes, ma'am.

The village map.

Yeah. So, what's the intent of that village center there? The red square.

Sure. the the red and vop is the non-residentidential commercial retail.

So that's like a little and these are set to be villages with a commercial nodes in the middle.

Yes, ma'am.

And residential coming out.

Mhm.

And I mean, isn't BP supposed to be something special?

Absolutely. Yeah.

What is special about that apartment complex? about the sighting, the whole thing that you know we just saw that one that Ryan is doing at Old Pasco Road and Overpass and that was special. I am very dismayed at this site plan. I'm not against the density or or the square footage that's come in here. I know they're trying to get more density. We want that in a village center, but I am very opposed to this site plan. I don't know if this is a binding site plan, but I can't vote for it with that site plan.

This letter at the top

as what?

Binding.

Yeah. No, I'm a No. I mean, all day long I'm going to We need something special. This is a strip mall and a suburban small apartment complex. What's special about this

in your village? And aren't the Isn't this is this anywhere near the super park?

The what? Oh, it's close. It's going to be a humongous international draw.

It's going to be something super.

This is at hand cart and key for

Yeah. I just

I just, you know, I No one ever showed me this. I would put a plug on that if I I can't sit here and fix it here, but I And again, I'm not against your uses. I'm against the way you've laid it.

It needs to be special,

Joel. two.

I'm a land use and development consultant for Evans Properties.

So, you want to design and plan the concept plan. That's what you're telling me.

I want to see a better project layout.

All right. Well, let me try to address that. Please understand that we have an existing approved MPD from 2019. Okay. That has no binding concept plan because they weren't required then. has none of your design control regulations, does not require us to build Kefir Road adjacent to our property. So, we have voluntarily agreed. When you say you don't like that, do you understand that these conditions and that plan does require us if we do town homes, we have to do the rear loaded town homes fronting on Kefir.

Are those town homes?

Let me let me just Well, apartments.

This is the There are two plans.

Oh, I only see that plan.

Let me explain what I'm doing. The one you have up here is if there are apartments on the west side of the wetland.

Does anyone have the other plan?

Sure.

That's the only plan.

They're both No, they're both in the MPD approval.

No, we're talking She's talking in our

right there. So if you read the conditions, Commissioner, we have to do rear loaded town homes fronting on Kefir so that you get your frontage look on Kefir that you've requested elsewhere. We have the right under the current zoning to do the standard commercial out parcel layout. Let me finish. Whereas this one, we're required to front the retail buildings on the frontage. Okay. We we spent months, this has been pending for two years. We spent months working out both of these plans. We agreed to insert all of these design conditions that the board has imposed since 2019. We agreed to abide by your C1 and C2 controls on commercial uses. We have none of those controls in our 2019 approval. So, because it's late in the day, we're perfectly prepared. If you don't want these additional controls and if you don't want Kefir Road built, we'll just live by the 2019 approval, have no restrictions and let the chips fall where they may because it's very disconcerting to come up here and be blasted that I hate this when I'm not sure you really understand the additional conditions that we've added to the property.

You know, no one came and talked to me about this. Well, was that staff's job or was it you have my cell number and you know where to find me and did you reach out to me at all to say I have a problem? That answer is no. So, I hate to get short but at this age my patience is getting a little thin. You also know how it works. If you have a problem and if you have a problem all you've got to do is let us know. Now, if you want us to sit down and go through this with you. so that we can get you comfortable that we are we have implemented in my opinion 99% of the controls you put on all the others we've done out there and we voluntarily added th this is verbatim William and Gavin will tell you these are verbatim the conditions that you've approved about six times in the last 18 months in VOP we're giving you exactly what you've required the other project

where where is the super

it is a half mile east of here, straight across Kefir. This is across from Pasadita. This is this is Kefir and Handcart right here.

Yeah. I mean, you literally if you go east on Kefir, which is a little northeast of this corner of this property, northeast is where the super

Where's Where's Mike Gavin's commercial?

He's uh he's north

all up and down. He's north and south of us. We actually took the gal the the bike galvvin impud conditions are what we used with Gavin and William to do these conditions. These are exactly the conditions you've approved on those projects.

Um so how many apartment and can you tell me what's there in the apartments? Uh if we do, we have we have to decide and notify staff that we're either going to do apartments on that west side or we're going to do town halls. Once we make that election, we have to buy abide specifically by the applicable concept plan. If we go on the west side, we probably because we have we have under 20 acres, we may have 15 acres usable. We probably could do close to 300 apartments maximum. The reason we want 350 is we actually want to retain some units in case we can get a vertical mixeduse developer on the east commercial side so that we would have some to put above the retail. That's why the 350 if we opt for the town home plan on the west side. Clearly we will not get 350 units.

Where are you looking to do vertical mixuse?

The east half of this property was approved originally for 100,000 square feet of retail. We're not slide, please.

Yeah, put that back up. We're not We're not changing that at all. See See the red stuff? The east half divided by the wetland was originally approved for 100,000 square feet of commercial. We aren't changing that at all. All we're doing is we're agreeing to agree to move the buildings up to the frontage, not have frontage parking, which you hate, not have out parcels.

Don't say don't say I I hate that. Well, not have out parcels, not have direct out parcel access.

Okay. And we've agreed to abide by your restriction on C1 and C2 uses that you've been imposing in VP VOP, we have none of those restrictions in our 2019 approval. So we frankly thought that in exchange for bumping up the density and as you know the reason to bump the density is this BOP FOP financial plan is absolutely going to fail if we don't achieve the density I didn't say the density

but I'm just saying I'm trying to explain to everyone why but in exchange for asking for the a little bit of additional density Evans has voluntarily agreed to now insert all of your retail controls and all of your residential controls. But if that doesn't work, let's just go back to plan A. Let's just keep what we have in 2019 and we'll go on.

Do you guys like this site thing?

Well, let me ask a question or two. Um, so on the red, it's all commercial. Yes, sir. Like what do you anticip shops, retail,

right? We I believe and I think this is this is a type one village most intense village category in BOP. This is one of the primary ones. The current interest is of course every grosser imaginative say

all the grocerers are wanting to get into VOP. They're knocking on everyone's door. Beyond that, my personal opinion is you're going to be looking at a good mix of boutique shops and restaurants and wine bars and some professional office. I think you're going to have a lot of people that kind of work out of their own office that that will want to locate out here close to home. So, I think we'll have a lot of professional offices, small retail, uh, grocerers. I mean, that's what I think the market's going to attract, but who knows?

But this this you haven't you haven't designed that kind of layout. We just saw one at we we we we just had one from Ryan

this retail and

commissioner because we're providing that drainage pond voluntarily to serve Hank cart road which they didn't have drainage for handcart. We've only got 10 or 12 acres of retail there. This isn't a 50 60 100 acre town center site. I mean, you can't design every project to do everything. And this is only one piece. Remember, you saw you saw the other image. This this village center has four corners. We just happen to only own this 40 acre parcel, but there are four corners to this. So, the total village center is going to have all kinds of other things. But this this is just the southwest quadrant of that four quadrant village center.

We really shot ourselves in the foot when we took out a lot of the requirements of the OP. You guys, you weren't on the board and you weren't on the board there, but originally it was not it was different and they came in and they they got us to uh we you know um

yeah this is

commissioner with all respect

not walkable I

well it has a wetland through the center we're building we're constructing the multi-use path along the entire northern boundary that goes straight straight across Keeper to the Super Park. Is that not walkable? A 12oot multi-purpose trail that goes

This is not a community. This This is This is the opposite of what I really hoped to see in the villages of Pasadena Hills.

Well, I don't know what your vision is.

I don't know what staff I don't know who worked on this. Um I I really don't know the rules. We we were supposed to have some kind of workshop on what's going on in the OP. I don't know if we ever did. Um but I I feel sorry. I feel Commissioner Oakley, this is your your hood and and this is this is nothing special.

This was all done prior to me being here.

This is nothing special. That's that's the

I didn't design it. I was around when they approved it, but I was not a commissioner. I'm going to say with the commercial the way it is and frankly if you need more commercial for more office or those work two spaces that these people go back and forth to great but one of the things we talked about and this is a big deal was having the all the buildings up to the front near the road

which we're doing

that's what you wanted to have and that's what he's done. No, that that you know that it it is there on hand part. Um

well, it is on Kefir, too.

I mean, if that's a a if that's a Publix, they they get a little squirly. I don't know if it's a Publix, but

Well, they all want to be up there. You can name every grocery in the market and every one of them is circling out there at all of these commercial centers. So far, no one has signed any deal with any of them to my knowledge. I just sent that picture to a very well-known planner. Um, and he said, "That's a hell of a parking lot. Whatever sort of walkable place the county thought VOP was going to be is not happening." And you know, I I don't see what makes that different from anywhere else. And it's just

Well, let me let me let me address that concern. If you read the conditions and again this condition is not in the current 2019 approval, but if you approve this, the retail design condition actually says that Evans will abide by whatever retail design criteria you adopt for VOP. I wrote that in

vertical mixuse.

Well, you're going to make somebody build vertical M. How many of those do you Dr. Ryan? How many vertical mixeduse projects do you have existing in Pasco County with you saying that for the last 15 years? How many of them are built?

But this is this is what that corner village was supposed to be. That's cuz we don't we don't require them.

Well, we're Evans is not a developer. And if you would like to purchase this and raise your capital to go build that vertical mixed juice, Mr. Linton will take that contract in. But Evans will probably sign it tomorrow morning. That's right. But until you're willing to put your capital behind those ideas, I think you need to be a little more fair about what you ask for.

Joel, let me ask a question. I'm going to ask for something.

So I look look at the connectivity and I know you got the connectivity to to the north.

When I look down at the lower three buildings and if you put maybe if there's and I don't know if it's how how long it is, how wide it is, whether it be or not, but even maybe a walking path going across the wetland going across some type of wood bridge. If you can get them to where they can get those lower parcels and then maybe get to the front of the building to the side, it might help a little bit. The ones to the north really don't need it because they go the other way. But if they help them, that would help them a little more accessible for the actually the five buildings to actually benefit.

And we did we did talk with parks about that. The concern is that environmental crossing. But I think when we get to site plan and site development, the conditions do require us to do our best to have an integrated walkable path system throughout the project. And if it becomes feasible to do a boardwalk crossing or two connecting those paths, then we certainly would take a look at that. But uh it does require walkability in the conditions.

And you know, this isn't a defined site plan. I mean, you guys are the ones that started requiring these concept plans. And all we can do when we have zero users

and we're completely guessing is just do the best we can to give you a rendition that again abides by what we understand from prior approvals to be the primary concerns. Those primary concerns are those rear-loaded town houses on the frontage. It's having those retail buildings push up on the road frontage. It's having walkable paths and connecting to the trail. I mean that's what we've been told to do.

Yeah. But but when you don't have a specific it's a chicken and egg and if you guys own this land and you're trying to develop this project and you had zero users but you have to get zoning first before you can attract a user you would have the same dilemma. It is impossible at this concept plan stage without any user to draw the plan that's going to be built and make everybody happy. And then of course everyone wants to be the planner and not everyone can be the planner because they didn't get retained for the project to do the planning. So it's it's it's patently unfair.

I have a question.

Um how many parking spaces do you have per unit?

Um you guys have the numbers. We we we resolved that based on the prior approvals in DOP. Um It's it's the 1.6 ratio for multif family that you've approved on all the other projects out there. And if we do every single one every single one out there has been approved at 1.6 and it's two three dozen of them. Uh and if we do the vertical mixed juice then you get a reduction in that because of that. So it's exactly the same standard. As I said, these conditions were the quote Galvin MPD conditions that we put onto this project.

Yeah.

And I've stood up here a dozen times and had those approved and been congratulated. What a fine job.

The layout, not not the um can I see what the town home one looked like, please?

Because we we don't have that in our book.

That one. Oh, wait. Go back to that. What? Can you explain? No, you you had it. Not that one.

That's the apartment. There it is. Sorry.

Can you explain what's going on there? Cuz I I don't really understand this one.

Well, the ones on the Kefir frontage that are the slightly darker shade, those are the rear loaded ones.

Town homes.

Town homes. All of these are town home uh areas. And then there we have your you remember the town home conditions that you've made us put in every town home approval for the last five years.

Hold up.

These are exactly those conditions.

So these are exactly the conditions that you mandated us to put in every MPD which we did not have in 2019.

Is there a clubhouse or anything for those town homes?

Well, there there there likely will be, but again we don't have the town home developer or user. So they will tell you, well, we would like that to be the third row would be our clubhouse or the second row would be I mean they'll decide that. But the point is we're supposed to show you a form of development that meets your basic rules. And your basic rules are rear loaded on the frontage, which we did. No more than so many units per building, which we did. How many trees go there? how long the driveway has to be. You can't park on the street. All those conditions are in here and they are exactly

I'm for parked on streets. But what's what's going up what's going on up there on Kefir Road?

Okay. Kefir Road. Um

right now we have no obligation to build anything. What we've agreed to build, which is going to cost us about twice as much as our development fees will be. So, we're going to be double upside down, but because Hankcart is under design to be built, we don't want to have to reconstruct the Handcart intersection. So, Evans has agreed to go ahead and require their developer, we are constructing essentially the west side of that handcart intersection to conform to the ultimate four-lane configuration. And the county engineer has approved this exact design because the problem is at the northwest corner of our property where that giant oak tree is and that house is that gentleman is pretty insistent that that new four-lane road is not going through his living room at this point.

Well, so we are

green is is the is the boundary of the future Kefir road.

Right. Well, let me tell you that story. the land owner on the north side of Kefir, he said the following. He's not selling his land. He's not developing his land. And he's not providing any right away to anybody. So Evans has voluntarily agreed that we are donating the entire 142 feet for that rideway off our property. Again, we're not giving you that in the 2019 approval. So, if you don't want that right away, we'll just stick with 2019. But in this approval, we're donating all that right away and constructing that road so that it can get back to the existing two lanes and not go through that man's living room yet. Jack,

I mean,

can I hear from

Commission Oakley?

Yeah, I've got I've got something to add to it. This from Han cart starting on Kefir. Kefir goes all the way to Curley. Curley and uh Kefir are the corner of uh Kirkland Ranch School, the high school. We have trouble out there. We're moving traffic around. Anyway, when this road eventually gets built, it's going to help in relieving a lot of that traffic issues we have. Plus on Elim coming on the south side of the school over to uh Kefir is a vision road that's going to come in one day that will further help with spreading out traffic.

So this this is all very important to get that road started.

Yeah. And I I'm not

and they are willing to do that.

Like I said, I'm not against the uses. I'm not against the density increase. I just wor

I have a question for staff. We had a better plan.

Mr. Jger.

Okay. Question. No, I'm parking in town homes. So, how many 1.6? What does that look like?

The the 1.6 is only for if they chose the multif family garden style.

Um the uh

this binding plan

that that ratio is only binding for those those purple units there. If they were to do the town homes, that 1.6 wouldn't apply. that those homes would ostensively have driveways,

apartments.

So, there are two different plans. The the beigy is town homes. The purple is multif family.

Okay.

So, if you flip

right,

flip back up. There you go.

So, that's that's 1.6.

Yes, ma'am. For the purple.

And then the other one, the town homes,

the the town homes ostensibly would have driveways. So, it would just the parking would be accomplished on the driveway. and where applicable we have in the conditions of approval that aren't on street parking would be permitted um if they can make the uh the geometries and everything work once they lay out the sites.

I I'll say because I say it at every meeting when we when we just plan these I want to make sure that there's ample parking because I look out for people getting towed. It's a pet peeve of mine. So,

um

what what is that um going down the middle? Is that a um wetland river.

It's a wetland area.

It's a wetland area. Drain.

I know. What? What category?

It's a category one.

Category one. It's weirdly shaped.

That's where it drains.

The headwater is connected to that big wetlands to the south on the site.

Okay. So, I want to hear y'all's thoughts on the on the conditions and layout and all those at at this very important corner of DOPA.

It is uh David Engel, planning and economic development director. I'd like to speak to the layout. So, we we spent an inordinate time and I I'm I'm surprised that uh this isn't a a plan to somewhat admire because we we we built up to the urban edge on all the perimeter streets. And if you look at either scenario, whether it be towns or multif family, there's a

most of the parking is screened from the roads. Um to accommodate on the town houses, we provided rear loaders with with an alleyway. So you have urban edge along Kefir Road. Um all the buildings, the retail buildings along handcart are built up brought up to the setback line besides a little separation on the sideyards. And um we tried to optimize the design. There's an accommodation for potential of vertically integrated mixed use in the the red areas

that I like. and and we we do have a walkability issue because of the class one and as Mr. Tu said during site plan they may want to bridge it with a walkway and there is an ability to traverse along Kefir road from one from the west side to the east side of the project where we we we're limited to do internal connectivity because of the wetlands. Um, I I do think the town home pro layout is is more attractive than the apartment layout, but and I and I get that there's challenges in the site with that thing going down the middle. Um,

the reason why it's a surprise is compared to the approved plan and what was being proposed, I I think this is a vast improvement. I I don't I don't know what was approved, but I hope I

Well, if you didn't like this, you would hate that.

Well, um

plus we're getting $4 million worth of road improvements. Just to just to give you a highlight, you know, why the density, what's in this? First of all, VOP has been built out below well below their entitlements, and we're not hitting the the proper benchmarks to get our roads approved. And in fact, I just met with Mike Galvin yesterday. He's the predominant builder in VOP. He goes, "Hey, you know, I I'm out there. There's no development yet. And Handcart Road is like a parking lot. We need to get our roads in and we couldn't support the road plan with the unentitled underentitled densities of these projects. This isn't a peripheral village area. And uh the original plan generates about $800,000 worth of mobility impact fees. This plan will generate about 2 million, 2.1 million to be precise. And the the cost of the Kefir road improvements are 4.1 million. So the to accommodate the county for the density, they'll be going to be generating more than double the impact fees and they're going to have to eat an additional $2 million in infrastructure costs

on the um on the traffic circulation. I see it's I guess that's a right in and is that a full access entrance off the keeper into the commercial?

That that is a uh there's there's a right in and there No, that looks like a full service intersection.

Okay. Cuz it looks like the one on cart is only right right out.

I mean I I it's not integral to

Steve Henry uh is the traffic engineer and designer in this project. They only have one right one full access uh entrance.

I'm curious why they didn't get one on hand cart.

Oh well on on handcart because of spacing um that there'll be a directional median opening to the south. So that that's shown on there.

So so if you look at that as you go from Kefir south there's a directional mil which will be left in right in right out. So that's what we're proposing there because of the spacing and the widening of of hand cart. That's all we could fit within the property frontage.

So to be clear, there's no left in from handcart into the

commercial.

No. Yes.

Yes. That it's a left in

coming from the south coming up.

Left in, right in, right out. There's no left out.

Just no left out.

Yeah. That's okay.

Once you go in to go shopping, you don't care if they leave or not.

Exactly.

But they just go to the back of the parking lot. We just go straight up and take it right or left.

Correct. Yeah, they go out to keeper and make a left to right.

It's easy and that's what they're going to do.

What you want to do?

Whoever your developer ends up being here um is very sensitive to the history of what this area is supposed to be and the super park, you know, the mountain bike park and everything that we're building right down the street. I hope there's a hotel on here. Um,

you know, I I wish it it could have been the commercial. I don't know.

All right.

Whatever.

All right. Let me explain.

Wait. Question for staff.

Feel like I was deja vu listening to Mr. Two up here talk to you, Commissioner Starky, earlier today.

Anyway, just

you guys know how much of a stickler I am for being compliant with the VOP plan.

It's at this level of density and where this is is within the proper circle. I'm going to ask every time because of what happened to village B at McCabe and Curley and that whole intersection right there.

My answer is sir that this is consistent with the VO adopted VOP plan and will Vermillion will confirm that if he can. A picture is worth a thousand words on these which is what I how I that's what I go online to the website and I look at the picture. So yes sir some of them have modified.

Yes sir. So let me I'll back us up to the village plan. This falls within that that red area and that dark brown area which is the

that's the town center,

right? So that's the the the core and the core residential which is up to uh which is the highest density residential and VOP as well as the non-residential.

So my my question is within VOP so north of it on the north side is the Han cart garden center. They've done a phenomenal job rehabbing that place and it looks fantastic and I hope they they do a great business. It's it's really a unique gym and I think they're probably going to evolve and do more than just plants. But within these urban cores like this, the garden center, how as time as time goes on, obviously there's entitlements to change, but how can we I want to ensure that we continue to complement the existing businesses that are such as unique as they are with the neighboring is a prime corner. They're on prime corner and there's two others, right? So I want to make sure that when when projects are coming through they're complimentary to what's existing. There's you know to make money off plants it's expensive and uh there's big time investment made there and and I'm very proud of what they've what they've built. So just something to keep in mind as VOP you know evolves.

Yes sir. And the there's a a method to the madness of aggregating uh this town center because the garden center will benefit from the additional traffic coming in and out of there.

All right. I'm just going to ask because no one commented, but does anyone from the public want to speak to this item?

Okay, let's do public comment.

Are they signed up? You want sworn in? Okay.

Swear.

My name's

Name and address for the record.

Hasn't been sworn.

My name is Marita. I live at 7310. And do you swear that any uh the evidence that you will give or the testimony you will give in this matter is the true self?

I do.

Thank you.

Okay. I'm here only because of

not this project here.

Well, we're only here to speak to this this project right now.

Oh, G. No, I'll wait then. Okay. Later.

All right. All right. I'm gonna make a comment as far as with the extra improvements that you guys are doing. I think it's huge. It's much needed. Um we we'll see some benefits down the road and as you do get an end user, I think that's the time to really dive into it. But what you've done with the layouts at the frontage, I mean, that was what we were pushing for for a long time. Uh I prefer definitely the town homeage, but we'll see what see what plays out. And I'm glad someone mentioned hotel because I think a hotel would be a nice little addition to that, too, because with that park right there, if we run big events, guess what they're going going to want to do? Stay right there. I think a public's right there or whatever is going to be a perfect fit cuz all those people going to the park and load up and go. So, this needs to be an intense thing. And I'm going to say this. If you guys have a user and you think you need more entitlements, especially commercially, I want you to come back and reach out to it because we can do more more of that verticalness and even create more jobs right in there as well. So be it. Don't be locked into just what you got. We appreciate what you got, but this at least gets it rolling to get the infrastructure in place, which will help. All right. Any further discussions?

All right. Uh to the board. Move approval. Second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor say I.

I.

I'm a reluctant I.

Any opposed?

All right. Approve. Five. Thank you.

Go to T70.

T70. We have proof of publication in the Tampa Bay Times. Publications of December 10, 2025 and December 17, 2025.

Joshua Allen Craftton, Real Property Division. Good afternoon. Real property team has received a petition to vacate portion of platted alleyways by Jason and Sarah Baker joined by the co-etition. The purpose of this vacation is for the expansion of their property. There were no objections to this petition and we recommend approval. Okay. Any questions? Anyone here to speak to item on P70? run to the board.

Approve.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Any opposed? All right. Five.

Okay. Item P72.

P72. We approve publication November 26, 2025 edition of Tampa Bay Times supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site posting. All right. Good afternoon. Amy Tall, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. P72 is PDE 26-7666. It's a zoning amendment in the name of Murphy Road MPUD, Oakley, Pasco County Property Trust at all. It's a resoning request from an RH mobile home district, an AR agricultural residential district to an MPU master plan unit development district to allow for the development of 434 single family detached units and associated infrastructure on approximately 118.82 acres located in southeastern Pasto County at the northeast corner of the intersection of Murphy Road and County Road 54. This comes with you uh or comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions. There is a presentation if desired

presentation. It's unregular. Okay. Let me just do a question. Um is there anyone here to speak to item P72?

Okay. I will do a presentation first and we'll have you speak. Okay.

I will be abstaining from this this vote. Well, make it quick.

Good evening. William Vermillion, Planning, Development, Economic Growth. Um, because of my employment here at the county, I don't believe I can be as curt as Mr. 2. So, I'll give you guys a nice and kind presentation.

I'll give them later.

I already texted them. The war has started. This is a uh this is a resoning request from AR Agricultural Residential and RRM uh mobile home district to MPD Max uh MPD master plan development for the maximum of 434 single family detached residential dwelling units on 118 acres. This is just on the north side of County Road 54, half a mile west of the intersection of County Road 54 and Chansy. Here's a location map showing this project in the eastern market area um just to the northeast of Zepher Hills. This is the aerial location map. The future land use map. This this area has a res 9 on the majority and res six just on the northern edge. The current zoning reflecting a majority RH and some AR. Here is a contextual map of the area. You can see in gray the site is bordered by the existing CSX rail line and to the south there's an I1 parcel that's currently used as an auto salvage yard along County Road 54. Um to the very north of the screen you have Pretty Pond Road where eventually that extension will will take uh traffic all the way out there to Old Lakeland Highway. You have Chenin Road and the Dory Road extension. The Doni Road extension, of course, the one running from east to west across your screen all the way to Old Lakeland. And Shinkin is an existing dirt road that traverses north and south. This this project went to planning commission a couple times and was continued. The original proposal was a lot more intense than what's before you today. So, I wanted to go over some of the changes that the applicant made after discussions with staff and some of the stakeholders in the community as well as the city of Zephr Hills. Um originally uh the proposal was for 672 town homes and single family detached units which was inclusive of the 40ft lots which I know that the the board is not in favor of. And so what what we did was we reduced down to 434 dwelling units total of single family detached and increased the minimum lot size to 55 square foot lots at a minimum. and we increased the landscaping buffering uh for the adjoining neighbors, especially uh to the north. So, here's the master plan. You can see that the internal roadway network, there's two primary access points off of County Road 54. as you as you move north uh across the eventual DRI road extension which bifurcates the property east and west and the green areas denoting some of those larger buffers uh being put into the north. The amenity center was also moved the mail kiosk was also moved to further central to the property to avoid any disturbance to some of the surrounding community members. Here are some of the the the buffering typicals to add a visual depiction. A lot of times folks up here say, you know, it's a type B or it's a type D buffer and there's not really a visual depiction that goes along with it. This

is a visual depiction of both the type D buffer and the type B buffer uh which will be um for some of those citizens in the neighborhood as well as along the rideway for the typical sections of the internal roadway. the the top of which is um the traditional 50-ft section that serves most of the residential neighborhoods in Pasco County with the 5ft sidewalks, the travel lanes. It's the one that's uh initially codified in in PM26. And then to the south, because of the two access and the amount of units in this, there's actually a type 1B collector road. And on that collector road, we work with the applicant to add a multi-use path in in lie of a sidewalk. So, you'll see on the right side of the screen there, there's an 8-ft multi-use path that will be traversing this road running north south for the pedestrians of this neighborhood. There are two variation requests with this proposal. The first from 91611 to not provide an interconnection to the east or to the northwest. um both to Chenin or Forbes because both of those are currently substandard county roads and didn't need further additional impact from the traffic of this development. Eventually at at some point in the future long long out in the future when the Dantry Road extension is completed from east to west that will provide the meaningful eastern connection for this project as it bifurcates the project.

Is there a stub out that's going to be set there? Let me back up. So there there is no stubout. So if we look um the majority of that area is existing the backs of existing homes. Let me try to point it's the exact the back of existing homes there and then eventually the eastern connection will be made of this vision road when built will give this the opportunity to connect uh in an eastwardly manner. The last variation being from 9013B that is the arterial and collector spacing. Like I mentioned before, there's two connections here on County Road 54. And uh the spacing because of the frontage that this property occupies. It's it's not mathematically possible to be able to meet the the spacing which is 660 ft. So the applicant proposed an alternative standard um to reduce the amount of width in between those um by a small amount um to be 592 ft and 525 ft respectively. Um that was done with a a transportation study which found that there would be no adverse safety impacts due to the minimal um reduction of spacing that wasn't mathematically feasible with the project's limited frontage on 54. With that, it comes with a recommendation of approval with conditions from planning commission and planning development economic growth. I'm available for any questions.

Let me ask Commissioner Starker, what do you think about the connectivity?

What

what do you think of the connectivity?

What is Okay, Clark. Clark, come down.

No, I'm asking you a question first.

I was I was looking up I was looking up the Shimberg study. Mr. Hobby,

Mr. Chairman, Clark, Hobby, Hobby, and Hobby PA 109 North Brush Street, Ben Sworn earlier. Uh, the connectivity, if I might address that, the only two roads we aren't connecting to, Commissioner Mariano, there's a dirt road called Chinkin, that's very local near the northwest corner. And the other road, Forbes, will have a connection to it when the vision road is ultimately built to it. It's just we don't want to connect to it now cuz Forbes needs to be improved for that to happen. So that's all the the big thing just to take a step back and I won't spend a bunch of time on this. The existing comp plan and the existing zoning allow for uh approximately 36% more units than the zoning that we're requesting. And the existing zoning allows those units to be either mobile homes or 40ft lots. And we're seeking 55 ft lots. So, this is a complete and total no-brainer in my opinion. The board should be jumping all over this as should the neighbors. We had uh probably 15 20 people at the first planning commission hearing and we were requesting town houses at that time and we downshifted the project substantially. I think by 40 something% of units got rid of all the town houses and that's why there aren't a bunch of neighbors here today. They finally understood we've really downshifted the project. Unlike Joel Clark met with me on that.

Anyway, I'm happy to answer any questions,

but it's um just to say one thing. This project went from 700 some units down to 400 and some units and much better project than it would have been if it was kept all the density that they had. So,

and when we ch added more landscape buffers, we did a bunch of stuff to make it better for our neighbors.

It's a beautiful project. You'd be very proud if you own the project you

Let's go to public comment. Anyone from the public want to speak?

Please come forward.

Anyone else please line up behind?

Catherine's got to leave at 5, so we got to get going.

59

38 Frontier Drive, Zephr Hills, Florida. 33540.

Okay. We're

And you have been sworn, ma'am.

Pardon?

And you have been sworn.

Oh, yes. I've been sworn like

needed to state it for the record. That's all I'm looking for.

Listen. Okay. Anyway, um Forbes Road when you pull out on it, you immediately go on railroad track CSX. And then there's another set of railroad tracks um to the east of Forest Lakes Estates. These railroad tracks are still in use.

Who used to address us?

We hear the horns. Okay. I can tell you the times a day, 8:00 in the morning and so on. Okay. Um, I do not see how this is possible since Forbes Road is lit literally when you come out. This is the railroad tracks. That's Forb's road. Okay. So, putting in extra houses or whatever it is you want to put in there is going to add traffic. Okay. Um, as you all know, and if you don't, I buried a daughter, okay? And I can show you pictures of the vehicle where she was hit and it rolled down the side of besides these railroad tracks. Okay, there's a lot of traffic that's coming up 54. It's just like and with the construction, it backs up. It is dangerous. Um there's no kind of lights just like there's no flashing light on Blandon's fire department and the light on the new 18 has a green light. So they've told me many times they come out and people just go right on by. But anyway, this is a mistake. Um, we have already had to deal with the damage from Gateway N54 with all of the things they've put in the road and the fact that they're leaving the road, dirt, nails, screws. I have been through three sets of tires and three windshields. And I'm over it. I am over it. And I know you all know that because I send you regular emails every time there's an accident. I have sent videos of people running red lights when there are ZPD officers sitting under a tree and do nothing about it. Um I have talked to William Poe about it. Don't get any answers. So, I will continue to send these emails and I also am sending them to somebody in Washington DC where you all think you're not getting help. I am. Anyone else here to speak to this item? If you would ladies, please come forward and let's line up.

Thank you.

First of all, this is my first time ever here. um attending anything related um with Zepper Hills.

Name and address for the name. I know you gave it before, but just one more and I live on 7310 Ryman Loop.

Have you been sworn

and if they put the picture back where it shows

uh there Ryman Loop is at the very top, the north of this project is the south of we have six residents. Um,

ma'am, I know you stated it for the last hearing, but as part of the record, we need to have on the record that you've been sworn.

I was sworn.

Yes.

I'm new.

Okay.

Uh, I did not I am the vice president of the Pretty Pond Association, which is the 49 houses on Ryman Loop. and we and the board didn't get the letter to make it to the first meeting. Um I was asked as the vice president in the land on that's my responsibility between resident resident resident to the board. I was asked to come here. We uh have a concern on on um with our HOA. When Milton went through, we had 30 over 30 trees that went down on Ryman Loop on the 49 houses. We had one house totally destroyed, couple seriously damaged. However, we had no water damage at all. We have three retention ponds. The properties on Forbes Road was wet. The property behind where the the now cow pastures and stuff was wet. We've had people on Chinken Road, I don't pronounce it quite right, that parked on our street and walked through our properties to get to their backyards because there was so much water. There were tractor trailers sucking water out on Pretty Pond Road for weeks. Rhyman Loop Street was dry. Our 49 houses were dry. of the two retention ponds that hold water from time to time. They were pretty full, but their banks not to the top. The one retention pond has never held water from 1999 until Milton and it had half its water. That was all. Every 5 years, the retention ponds get inspected. It happened December of 2024, right after the storm. They all passed. Our retention ponds passed. They were in very good shape. The concern we have is with the infrastructure and the streets and the housing development. Will there be an impact? So how the water is absorbed, how it'll impact the six residents that are right there where there's two retention ponds, those two pictures, the two blue parts. Will that impact? And if it does, who do we work with? Who do we talk to? I I'm looking for advice. Um, time's up. Um, thanks for your input. Okay.

Anyone else here to speak to this item?

Anyone in line?

No.

Okay. We'll close public comment to P72 and to the board. Does staff want to address anything that was just spoken to?

Drainage.

William Vermillion Plane Development Economic Growth. Um, of course the the pre and post it it the the pre-development's not going to not going to change. So there their storm water pond shouldn't be impacted because they're going to be compensating for for all of the pre-development. Any further discussion? All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? House pass unanimous. I abain with theation.

Mr. Chairman,

I abstain from voting.

Yes. I'm sorry. 40.

Clark, could you could you let her know about the flooding? How the engineering work

or one of them? Someone needs to talk to so she gets their questions answered.

Okay. Are you

uh committee reports? I think we're commissioner Waitman.

Uh yes. Where's Ralph?

Ralph will be involved in one of these. So, um, Mr. Starky's team was there. I'm not sure. But anyway, so this picture,

this is a picture. Katie's in one of them. She was there. She and Jenny both to prove it. I don't have I guess I didn't mean to tell you.

They were there.

So, anyway, have a picture.

Tunnel Tunnels Towers opened up their amenity center in the Doug Village. 24,000 square ft. just I mean hundreds and hundreds of people from all over the country showed up to this event. Pasco Fire um their honor guard led the procession uh and the backpipers in and and and just well represented Pasco Fire at at this event and um it it was pretty pretty strong and hopefully that I don't know maybe there's a village to partnership because there's classrooms, swimming pools, you name the physical therapy opportunity and social opportunity within within this within this building. It it was it was pretty neat. And I know I don't normally show events that I I go to, but this was one of them worth noting. Um the main piece is a legislative issue that's I've been following and it's with the uh I forgot the house number, but it deals with the HOAs and the dissolution of potentially the HOAs. And right now it's roughly 20% of the vote. My concern is I don't know if we need to get fack involved to bird dog it. there's not a companion in the Senate um and maybe FAC for the cities is who if if these these entities were to dissolve who's on the hook to foot the bill cuz right now uninccorporated county and cities don't put the bill pay for the mini sidewalks roads landscaping and if property taxes are you know happen to be reeled in and whatever changes are potentially happen that it it'll be it'll be a budget bust for cities and counties across the state. And so it was just this piece I've been following and I have a concern with because it deals directly with our budget in our millage rates. And um so I didn't know if there was any other insight on it or if any of the board members have been following it or Ralph, but it's there's a huge monetary um and and there is and and um and like you said, there is an incident companion on that. Um, one thing to note in the house when a bill is uh assigned to committee, which this has been, if it's more than three, that's not a good sign. This has got four committee stops. It is on the radar for FAC. It has been raised at some of their meetings, but I don't see this going far. We will, it's been on my list to monitor and we will continue to monitor.

I bring it up.

I just don't think it'll go far. It's been on most every local news station and it's getting a lot of attention.

Well, you got to understand, as long as I've been in the process, HOAs have been the number one complaint to the legislature and the legislature has never wanted to touch any legislation pertaining to that. It's it's a neighbor versus neighbor fight issue. and and for them to come out and actually file a bill and and and move it, you know, and and put it in, you know, for committee assignments, of course, it's going to get a lot of news on that.

So, again, I don't think it's going to go far, but we will continue to monitor it. I'm sure FAC will weigh in as well.

Little with live local for a while on an island.

What

uh and then boom, everybody's like, "Oh, talked about it for months and everybody's like, "Shut up, Wait." Uh, and then it happened, right? This is just another one because of property taxes, our budgets.

That's a big that's a big ticket item. Um, so I just figured I'd paying everybody's radar.

Appreciate it.

I agree with you that it's

poorly written.

Scary.

20%.

It but it doesn't assign the obligation to us. assigns it to something called a association trustee, but then it doesn't provide any way for the association trustee to finance.

So, how did the stuff

how did we end up with the defunct HOAs and parts of the west part of the county? How did we

Oh, they went so many of them went under

and then we end up doing what we had

and MSB do. What we had was we created a road and bridge or it was created by election a road and bridge district if you're talking about Highlands and Pasco Road. Um and then when that elected board went away the legislature said it's your problem. my point,

but it's not

it's unlike the CDDs and the um CDDs and those other special districts. There's no real tie. You didn't create an HOA. So, there's no real tie to give it back to to the county. Now, their roads, if they have private roads, would be a common improvement. And it says that the trustee is supposed to get rid of them. Well, how do you get rid of the rope? I mean, it's not well thought out as what's going to happen if they

and the amenities in the pool,

right? I I agree that if it if it goes anywhere, it's needs significant work.

It's I I it's concerning the way it's written. Yeah. Today.

So, I'm done. Thank you. Well, I just like to say before you go further, as you as you've ended, uh, I want to say your work in live local, your awareness to it and your constant bringing it up was a big asset to this county and as well as to the state to look at it and get focused. So, don't short self yourself there. You were a great leader in that position. So, thank you for that, Commissioner Starky.

Okay, I want to scroll through those pictures that my staff might have sent very, very quickly. Um, I attended the groundbreaking for Kobia Cove, which is the uh Dominion project. It's right there at by Ankl High School. It's going to be Look how nice that is. That's the whole thing is 60% AMI and there's four high four schools within this this area and um I just think it's going to be a a a great project. I uh attended the TMA. It um I donated some bikes and worked worked the Met Metropolitan Ministries tent. I didn't make it to the Pano. I had some other meetings that kept me from going, but my staff was there when they were handing out the food. I did um make my cook annual cookie trays and with my girlfriends and um delivered them to the rack wrap house and Metropol ministries. Um Katie and Jenny attended the tunnels to tower ribbon cutting. Um, and there's some of the pictures. That's really nice.

They were there.

Yeah, that that is that is absolutely beautiful.

Their playground. I mean, it's pretty neat. I stop in and see it.

I I will talk to you at the next board meeting about amending our ordinance to allow um others to make code complaints because right now, Pas County rules are you have to live next door and I'm going to tell you some of the consequences of that. Um, I wanted to make sure that um we don't miss the deadline for the parks uh MSTU and the sheriff's MSTU. When when are we talking about those things?

So, we've already established the MSTU.

No, we have to put the numbers in.

Oh, that's always by the trim. So, that's July.

We'll have to do it till July.

Okay. Um Derek Burgerer, who used to be my aid, is uh leaving uh for the Navy. He's um going and how long has he gone for?

Um he's not leaving the county. His his job is on hold by law,

but he is going into the Navy to be a chaplain.

So, um he'll be gone January 10th he leaves. Um but he's uh we're excited he's going to serve his country in the Navy. Um, okay. Couple of things and Jack, you touched on it real quick. Um, that I think you should be paying attention to. One of them, do you have any other picture any other up there? So, okay, this one I was what I was looking through when Clark was going through his thing. I thought it was page 36, page 33. This is from the Shimberg report and I haven't gone through all of it yet, but my husband called this out to me, so this is the only one that I have put down to memory. This is the median home values in Pasco County. Our our average um medium home value, where does it say there is three? The average is 391. We're 351. Um, look at look at where we are at the 500,000 and below, you know, the bigger value homes compared to our our neighbors. And and let me tell you why this is important. Because it takes and I don't know what the number is. I'd like for someone to get it. Um, u maybe Dr. Bellis can get it for us. there is a certain value of a home where um they they add to our revenue rather than take from it. Right? So if we are a county that fills up with homes u and probably is around 400 or something only, we're going to bankrupt ourselves. It's going to be more takers than givers. We have to pay attention to this. We have to pay attention to this. We need more high value homes. They add so much more per capita to our general revenue if we still get to property taxes. But this is we are way below the average and it's was really surprising to me and I I don't know how much property we have left and I don't know how we can shape this but I think this is a discussion an economic discussion that we we we need to have on how we can help break that ship. Um the other the other um thing I wanted you to take a look at is the Florida Tax Watch came out with their new new updates and a lot of them um are like really really revol relevant. I wanted you to know, you know, we the sheriff used to say we're 64 out of 67 counties. Okay, we're now like up in the 50s. So we have made a maybe in the 40s. I I you were supposed to get some of these, but maybe you didn't get them. Okay. Municipal per capita county municipal public safety expenditures were 48. We used to be at 64.

Well, that's but that combines fire and

Yeah, but in that same category, we were 64th and now we're we're 48. Um, and let's see what else. Uh, some so per this one I thought was really good. Percentage of available lo local option sales. No, that isn't one. Per capita total property levies. This one total property tax levies per 1,000 personal income. The average in the state is 300 and I'm sorry 3274. We're number 38 at 25. There's some really interesting stuff in here. we are still super super affordable uh compared to our neighbors and and I would say maybe to a detriment to our our fiscal future. So I don't think what we did today on the three three uh ordinance are going to hurt us because we're still way below everybody else in the cost of living care. Um so I hope we can uh dissect the Shimberg study. Um you brought it up on the multif family.

Yeah.

And um and some some of the other stuff in a at a future meeting.

Let me let me let me enhance the conversation a little bit if I could. So

if you look at places like Anava, look at places along Loot's Northern Hills Road. What do you see? Golf courses. Well, high-end homes, high-end people. All our golf courses work on reclaimed water used to be storm water. we take and take the fees to go punish those people with reclaimed water fees that have just gone up and up and up. I think we should be taking a look at not only not doing that to encourage more golf courses, but maybe look at um how we had the changes with the hockey rink years ago at Adan Ice. We're going to charge them a million dollars to come in and build something for us to go use. There's going to be an attractor bringing people in. Golf Coast is going to bring high-end people in, probably executives coming in. and you want to change those demographics, get some houses going like down in Fox Hollow going for a million million plus, that's what you need to go see. Um, I would I would say if you want to go to take a look at some things, that's something we can do before it's too late, before everything else gets developed.

I think we have an opportunity with 4G to hope that it's mostly executive homes. Um um I talked with some folks about Panther Ridge is is looking like they're coming in with some higherend homes. Um and I just, you know, I think we need to look at these little pockets. And I don't I don't know how we incentivize a higher

you do it through minor real subdivisions, larger lot sizes.

Larger lot sizes subdivision.

We have to be more balanced for fiscal. I'm I'm going to tell you what's what's people come down to Florida, they they golfing their fish, go to the beaches, right? We need to put some in incentives out there with the golf courses. You want to do some other things too to get the highinook people. Let's find out what they want and encourage something to go along. But literally what you've done with the golf courses, you've actually minimized that.

Anything else, Commissioner Starky?

Nope. I'm done and I got to go.

Commission.

Is it 5:00 already? Is it five o'clock already?

Oh gosh.

Commissioner Jagger.

All right. So, I will be super duper quick. So, this is um Commissioner Starky was um gracious enough to um let me intrude in her district and we partnered with Grace's food pantry and we also have a free senior store in there where the residents who are signed up for congregate dining can shop for free. So, um, and how we're getting the stuff for our store is through our partnership with Walmart. So, we are super excited about that. Next slide. Okay. So, we did stockings for seniors and this was so much fun. This was the Elfers lo Oh, okay. Okay. This was alers and um, super fun. But go to the next one and I'll explain it. So, we came in and that face with the the Grinch feather. Um, we had put some Grinch feathers in stockings. So, the seniors were so funny. They were like, "The Grinch came and got in my stocking." So, um they were super super happy. Lots of smiles. We um Christmas carolled and had a blast. And next year we're going to have Santa and then when Santa leaves we're going to have the Grinch come in. But we were able to sponsor 115 seniors. So, we were very excited um to help provide Christmas for them. Okay, so this was our toy event out in Moon Lake and thank you to Metropolitan Ministries. They helped with toys and we were able to provide Christmas for 240 children.

Very nice.

So that was a really cool event. So and um we did Mike Pasanos and then we also um the girls went to uh Metropolitan Ministries for toys. So that's it for district four.

Very good. And I want to give a good shout out for Gracie's food pantry too. Um they had reached out because they had extra food around. So they went to the hopes uh excuse me the the robe center and they went to holy ground and provided food out there as well. And now they've made a connection with them. And I've got some pictures coming up with a HEA and I was at the HEPA house that opened 2004 in Pasco. The I said this is something I talked to Mike about it briefly yesterday but this is a a program where they come in and they get HUD housing. They can take these people that are on social security and all they get they get subsidized from it. They just pay 30% of their income and they can live in a home and live in an apartment and those apartments are pretty nice up there. Very social. The lady who's been there has been there for probably 15 years. She says I'm going to plan to retire. Do you have some of my pictures or no? I was wonder if I had to get a new phone. Uh so at a we had this dinner last night. The gentleman behind there, u he's an Air Force veteran. He he oversees all of HEPA. Um then Jimmy Mris who's construction board appointee for me, but he's also in charge of our uh for residential developments as well. So he's going to be looking, we'll be working together about going forward. Last night at their dinner, they actually invited me up to speak because they liked what I said about trying to help with CD CDGDR, the programs we had going on and how we wanted to see more of what they were doing coming in because I think it' just be a big help for us all to get those really lowinccome people uh and get them a place to live. Uh go ahead. Next pictures just kind of shows you I think some things in there.

That was the only one you got.

I'm getting a new phone.

One for five. All right, that's good. All right. Um, well that I have nothing else. So I wish everyone a happy new year and carry on from here. We're journ. Thank you. Heat. Heat.