9.9.26 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

Chairman, good afternoon, commissioners. Kevin Pisca, director solid waste. I'm here to present resolution by the board of county commissioners of Pasco County, Florida, establishing annual disposal assessments, tipping fees, and other rates, fees, and charges for funding the solid waste disposal and resource recovery system pursuant to the Pasco County Code of Ordinances, Chapter 90, Article 3. also authorizing preparation of the annual disposal assessment role and the preparation of the appropriate bills and the certification of the assessment role. [clears throat] I've got a few slides to present to you today. Um a little bit of history. If you recall, uh the last seven years we had a 7 by7 plan for increasing assessment rates and that was primarily to fund the waste to energy expansion which is uh undergoing right now. Um we successfully closed on the bonds issuance in February of this year. Um, so with that being said, uh, we are not planning to increase the rate this year, uh, for the upcoming fiscal year and maintaining our tipping fees at $14.3 a ton and the equivalent resid residential unit rate of $114 per eru. Um, as we go to the next slide, you will see that Pasco's total residential cost of collection and disposal remains low when compared to other waste to energy communities. Uh, you can see here we're uh the second most economical in that in that range and some of the higher ends are significantly more expensive than what uh Pascos charges. One other thing, this is a new look this year. Uh, I'm not sure why I'm showing notes. Sorry about that. Let me try this one more time. Here we go. So, if you go back and you benchmark um Pasco County's disposal cost starting in 1993 and bench that against the consumer price index, you can see where we are year-over-year. Even with the last 7 by7 increases that you see on the steep climb starting in 2019, we are still 11% lower than what the rate would have been when compared to CPI. And that's about a 14% decrease in costs when you benchmark it against other types of indexes [clears throat] more that more closely resemble solid waste disposal and hauling. So overall I you know I think our our our costs are reasonable and less than CPI. And Kevin, one of one of the things with that factored in, we actually used to have a really good energy rate with Duke and that got changed when the laws changed and that actually hurt us a lot, but we still maintain stability as we're building a brand new plan which help us for us stability down the road.

Yeah, that's excellent detail. In fact, not only was the 7 by7 rate plan established for funding the waste to energy expansion, it was also put in to offset that u that a very good energy plan contract that we have that really is now about a $20 million per year headwinds to the department. So with that, the solid waste department recommendation is for the board to adopt the annual disposal rate resolution and authorize the county administrator to certified the nonadvalorum assessment role to the tax collector. Okay, any questions for staff? Okay, is there anyone here from the public that wanted to speak to this item that didn't come out earlier?

Okay, there's no one. that there is no one online.

Close public comment to the board.

Move approve.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Any opposed?

Motion pass.

Thank you.

We could continue the orange bell trail item. I think we just finished the staff presentation.

Yeah, we had finished the presentation and got the public comment.

So to the board for questions. Yes, I

or Katherine's starting.

No, I was just going to say I just had I just had lunch with Terry Schrader and Andy and they are just fine with the um staff's recommendation. It isn't my first choice for a route, but I think it's a route that will um get this trail done. And as opportunities come in the future, there can be tweaks. But right now, I think the staff um and the consultants have found a a good compromise and um and look forward to getting this going for the residents up on this side. Yeah. Which way the if you go back a couple to the um next next

that the color coordinated a

that one.

There you go. Um red line 3B just as we build east. It's just incredibly important that we use the existing rideway that's there and use the existing trail network that DOT has already built along 52. So, you know, riding a bicycle on public roads is a pretty dangerous hobby. You take your life into your own hands if you choose to to exercise that way. Um, and you know, it's just just a risk. But I I think economically the red line then just follows state road 52 to county road 52 uh for the economics around the project and since that multi-use path is built I think you know for feasibility sake that I'm I'm more partial to to using what's existing versus coming up and around and under the under 75 and then coming back down. So, I just wanted that on have that on the record to you to use what's there. But it's come a long way. I appreciate staff's time and and all the public meetings. I know the east side of the county folks were incredibly passionate uh about the the the trail and its initial [clears throat] uh its initial direction, but um it's a it's a much better we're landing in a much better place today than we were in the past. Um, Commissioner Commission.

So, um, you know, my very first NO meeting, um, in 2012 or one of the first was, um, a meeting with DOT when they were redesigning the intersection of 75 and 52. And when I cuz you know I'm the one who put that route on when I was Governor Scott's appointment to the state greenways and trails council. I [cough and clears throat] put that proposed route on for the county as one of my last things I did at on that council and um knowing that it was you you just have to suggest a route but where it lands you know gets massaged and seeing that DOT was taking out the train underpass of 75 and messing with the orange belt trail which is one of the states going to be one of the states Premier Trails DOT went back and they redid the design of 75 and 52 and they put that crossing underneath it to the tune of a million dollars. They re-engineered it to put the uh what is what's it called? Um, start with the no that what's the road that goes under north of 52 and 75

Aussie

Murphy and and they saw immediately what was going on because you don't want cyclists crossing the on and off ramps of a major highway. And if you were to take 3B, you would be killing a lot of people because they would be going through the on and off ramps of both of of a major interstate. So that is why the state went back and put the Aussie Murphy underpass in. The yellow part that's to the east of 75 is mostly built already. Target built it.

And the part on the left is being built right now by the developers on that site. So there's really very little expense to take it off a major six lane. [clears throat] I don't was it eight lane at the intersection. It's not where you put a worldass trail and where you want people to be safe. Um, so I would suggest we stay with the recommended 3A and um or I don't know which one is it? Yeah. 3A. Yes.

And we may have some more opportunities in the future to even improve all that, but that's really kind of already built [clears throat] already. So if I mean if people want to drive under the interstate, ride their bike, I guess they have that opportunity. But suicide mission. Well, we built a trail. There's not a trail. Now look to talk about this the trail path killing people. These folks are choosing to get on a two-heel bicycle and pedal down major streets and up and down wherever in Balanton and all. It's it's their decision to do that hobby. But it's our decision to be as as efficient and effective with penny money as we can. And that's my whole point is to to do the best job we can with the existing uh trail infrastructure to continue to to use the penny money. A trail is a want. It's not a need. We have a tremendous amount of needs in this county and the penny is is got a lot of demands on it. So I just I'm just stating that for the record that I'm sensitive to how much we spend. I'm not going to fight this. I'm just just stating some facts here. So,

and if I could, so if the cost of 3A is being born mostly by developers, I can get peace with that.

Yes, it's it's already there.

So, and so you talked to Terry Stra about these couple.

He's fine with this. Yeah.

All right. Having said that, here's here's what I look at. I look at the old 52 compared to the new 52.

And you know, sing Leo, I know they talk about developing, but that gets squashed. So don't know if they're coming back. But try to imagine you could be driving a bike down that steep road going one way or trying to move up it the other way. I do it now.

Well, they do it, but most people aren't going to be able to make that thing up.

Go somewhere else.

Well, so so my so here's my So thank you for the and if the golf course is there and the balls are going to hit you, that's another issue as well. But when I look at the other 52 and Commissioner Stark, you had brought this out as well when it was being built. Like how did they leave this out? But there's that one piece toward the end. If that was complete, you would have a trail running all the way from that point where 3A ends and runs all the way to that point. I think there's just a couple of pieces. That was one of my conversations I had with staff about go find out about getting that piece of property, find out what it would cost, and let's go take a look at that. Because if you could do that and you would take that whole road be nice and level that everybody could ride and get there back and forth, not worrying about that big hill or the golf course beside it and I think be a lot safer right there if you had that one extra section that would be right about happy right before Happy Hill Road to go. Did you guys have any luck with going through that exercise and figure it out?

So we we did take a look. Um as noted the university and the town of St. Leo and the town of San Antonio prefer the route and county road 52 because of the things that they're trying to do. Um, as you also noted on State Road 52, the trail exists today up to Curly Road, but they stopped at Curly. To get from Curly to Happy Hill is relatively easy for most of it, but as you get really close to Happy Hill, if you think about it, there's actually two bridge structures that the road is up on that it's elevated. And then there's also the retaining walls. So, the trail would actually have to go down, up, and back down. So, it would actually have some hills to it. Um, similar to what's on County Road 52.

There there's not room on the road itself to put the trail.

I understand. But if you want behind the retaining wall inside the property, correct?

You could make a move going down and around,

right? We would be down below where the bridges are and up above the retaining wall. So, that's what we looked at.

Structure difference from building alternative ADP. you get some numbers on what it would take to do.

So 4A is a little bit more expensive than 4B because of all of the drainage things that we would need to do along County Road 52. The difference is basically 9 million versus 8 million between 4A and 4B.

A million bucks a penny.

So I um not necessarily there's Sunrail money because this is a Sunrail Trail. I was uh asked by Dewey Mitchell and the president of St. Leo and there someone was supposed to be here from St. Leo to come meet with them because they are so ecstatic about this trail that they wanted actually to go in their campus and meander through the campus of St. Leo and they are really looking forward to it coming to their new downtown for economic prosperity. Um so uh there and there there are developments that are coming along on 52 old 52 that will be building their part of the multi-use path that will cut that price down. So um and anyway th this is not something that's going to happen overnight. This is going to take a decade or [clears throat] more unless you know the world changes but um to to complete some of this. But there's actually quite a few pieces that are kind of done. That green one that goes through Cypress Creek, that's pretty much done.

Correct.

Um air cutoff. Um I think we're improving that road. So uh that won't be much. Um Tampa Bay waters letting us come up there right away on this other part from Aaron Cutoff to the uh to the entrance. Um, we don't have to buy this other part that's coming um across the bottom of CPEB. The part of Bellamy Brothers is already built that goes up to 52. The part from 52 over to Aussie Murphy is already done. the developers uh sharing in the cost of that part from Bellamy or no old Pasco up to um us the under part it'll connect with the target we just have that little piece on the other side of the target that's really going through county property so there's no purchase there um and then we we work our way uh on this purple part that that probably will be the last piece that gets done unless you know, we nominated for Suntrail money again in this for the state. Um, and then you connect to the Hardy Hardy Trail and Wy Gucci. So, um, the Meridian, they don't I don't think they have to buy any more property to to widen that

to where

on on Meridian.

No, what we're going to do with Meridian is leave the trail that's already there,

which is 8 to 10 ft wide. And we have about a block and a half that we have to build and the right of way is there.

Yeah. So, I don't know. Maybe they'll get lucky and you'll get the people off the streets in that area and onto a nice safe place for all the new moms and their kids to come out and push their strollers and take their kids for an ice cream on a nice safe trail and help all the businesses that are going to pop up along it. So,

so I'm glad we finished off at the end of the 5A 5C. So, that's good. that um you guys are good with the full deal for alternative as well together as well.

Y to the board.

I move for approval of the staff's recommendation.

Second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor say I.

I.

I. Any pass? Good job. Hey. Oh my god. I can quit now. [laughter]

I didn't come out gun crazy. [clears throat] Item P44.

All right. So P44 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times March 25th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Victoria Pitos, Planning Development, Economic Growth. Item P44 is PD260033. This is an ordinance amending the pas county comprehensive plan uh providing for a conference text amendment to sub area policy 7134 Paul metal ridge. This is it coming to you with the request request to continue to the October 6, 2026 BCC meeting at 1:30 p.m. or assumed thereafter may be heard in date city. Second all in favor say I. P44.

P44 was

P45. What did I say? Anyways, P45 was advertised in Tampa Bay Times July 22nd, 2026.

Item P4 uh P45 is PD260949. This is an ordinance by the Paso County Board of County Commissioners amending the Paso County Land Development Code uh amending section 403.5 construction plans and other sections. It's a request to continue the item to the September 22, 2026 Newport Richie Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter say may be heard in Newport Richie.

Have a motion move.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Item P46.

P46 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times June 24th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Item P46 is PD 260007. This is an ordinance amending the Paso County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 and sheet 23 from res 9 residential 9 units per gross acre to res 24 residential 24 dwelling units per gross acre on approximately 15.267 acres of real property a portion of 18.634 634 acres of parcel 232621002000 071 0 020 located on the southeast corner of the intersection of US highway 301 G Boulevard boulevard and chansy road and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repeal of serverability and an effective date comes with recommendation to adopt the ordinance by roll call vote and there's a presentation if so desired presentation

presentation Uh [clears throat] this project uh is a comprehensive plan map amendment which is changing the future land use from res 9 to res 24. Uh and the purpose is to allow for maximum development of 300 multif family units on approximately 15 or so acres uh of a 18.634 acre parcel. And as noted in the ordinance description, title description, it's at the southeast corner of the intersection of US Highway 301, which is G Boulevard and Chansy Road. And there is an accompanying reszoning associated with the project um which is PD 267832, the Gagy Robert H Trust Gagny MPUD. This is the general location in the county. It's in the southeast part of the county, just south of Zepper Hills in the East Market area. Uh this is the subject site itself. This is the whole 18.6 acres. Uh you'll notice G Boulevard is west of the subject site. Uh Chansy Road is uh to the north and there is Crystal Springs Road which is on the east boundary line. Uh this is the general area uh that we are uh looking at as part of this project. Um, of note in the area is uh the location of Zeph Zephr Hills just to the east along Paul Buckman Highway. Uh, there are unincorporated densities to the west that are mobile home parks. Uh, these mobile home areas are similar in density to the value that's proposed in this particular project. Uh, the project is proposing a res 24 future land use. However, the ultimate density in the project is currently coming out at 19 dwelling units per gross acre. Within vicinity of this 19 dwelling unit per acre proposal, there are the mobile home parks which are generally at about 14 dwelling units per gross acre. These have been there since the early 1970s. Um, at the intersection uh, let's go back. At the intersection of Chansy and G Boulevard, uh there is uh common commercial feature land use associated uh with the site, the subject site and that does carry a 24 dwelling unit per gross acre uh density by comparison. Uh this uh site is within the airport approached surface area. Uh and you can see the Zephr Hills airport uh to the north and east and any subsequent uh reszoning action we'll have to take that into consideration as well as the development of the site any development of the site. Uh [snorts] it's also within the airport influence area. This is the two areas in context with the site. Uh this is the current res 9 uh depiction that we have on the future landings map today uh with the res 24 overlaid on it. This is what it will look like. Uh you'll notice the blue just to the at the apex of the corner there. That is the comm portion. Uh which is at the southern terminus of a an entire corridor that runs along boulevard. Um that is RO which is the orange on the map. I lost my pointer. Uh these are the policies that are generally associated with this uh proposed map amendment to the comprehensive plan future map amendment and this comes to you as noted before uh with the recommendation to adopt the

proposed comprehensive plan amendment and uh ordinance by vol. Yeah, Terry, in this same area here, there's you're you're sitting right on two like Ch's two-lane road also 301 right there's two lane that two lane connecting is right on down to Hillsboro County on G Boulevard 301 going to the south. I just have concerns we keep adding apartments and complexes like this and putting more and more cars on two-lane roads that are they going to be fourlane? Yeah, someday they will be, but if it's not done before this comes in, you're shoving all that traffic right in on two-lane roads that are already I mean, you go there right now and you backed up traffic just that's a real issue for me is the fact that we're doing some of this on two-lane roads. We should be looking at makes because I heard there might be a possibility that China gets fourlane, but I don't know when that's going to happen. So

if you said it was going to be four lane today, it would be five at least five years or further down the road before handling that traffic.

Yes, sir. With the uh as part of the comprehensive plan review, there's a transportation needs assessment that is conducted which is a a general review of the transportation network in the area and the uh the roadway segments that were analyzed which included G Boulevard. Um the transportation review indicated that the study area will operate within the adopted level of service with background traffic uh with the addition of the net increase in the project traffic based on a 2050 cost affordable plan. So um this according to the land development code following those criteria it's indicating that it's going to be operational uh even with the background traffic added but your point is noted and I think there's a discussion regarding that as part of the MPU

and I'm sure we got a ride away for the roads being widened in the future on on both sides of this property.

Yes sir.

Okay. M think there understand the continuity approach here right with the mix of densities at this intersection when we look at the trying to figure out the road network to the west of this site across street on golf the mobile home park that has a res 99

res 90 I think it's res 99 of range.

Yeah. If you're getting that data point from

That's how that reads.

Yes sir.

Say if that were to ever because you look at you know if that were [clears throat] ever be redeveloped or that that site were to be sold and become something else um which it could. I mean, it's a c this is a corridor that's growing and there's a lot of investment coming in um to to plan for the you know plan for the future here on on the appropriate on the appropriate uses and how to structure this corridor. So, um I guess back to the road road road network point um if this were to be flipped and multif family were to be put here that would put us essentially how many units based on acreage based at a res 9.

Yeah. At a res 9 it would be about 300 or so units.

Okay.

Yeah. at res9 and I think today um if my eyes if my eyes served me correctly um there are there are over 300 mobile homes on site.

Yeah, it's a there's a it's large.

Okay,

I'm done chair. So, I'll say that um I think and Commissioner Oakley after you talked about this road even like a few months back

trying to make that left turn down 56 from Johnson from the other side. It was like at least three light streams to make it through and I've been I've done subsequently to that too coming back to Paduk the other way and still a couple lights it was middle of the day.

So, it's a lot of traffic that's in that area. Um the top node of it is commercial that about 3 acres there.

Uh yes about approximately three acres.

You've got apartments other high intensity coming down behind it's going to drive the quarter even further which I don't think staff even considers that when we're going through these things because the calculations are done. But I mean it is such a jam-packed area now to throw more density in there even though there's other density there. I like expanding the commercial and trying to work with that.

Yeah. The problem also is that when you go south on 301 there, you run into an area where there's a new light there right now, right in front of the trailer park on the north side of the road. There was a lot of accidents happening until I got that light put in there by FDOT and they they did a great job getting that in there as quickly as possible.

But the fourlane to me should have already been done through there and and on pass 56. I just think it would been better if we looking at this and it had four lanes instead of two in front of it.

And I tell you, I'm not I'm not comfortable in the height. You got the airports there as well. It's right in the flight. So going from resite to this allows that extra height which otherwise get any other questions Steph. Um well I was okay with Mr.

Start

I was okay with this transition. Um but what are the rules for the height? What you mentioned something but that it would have to be looked at. What what does that mean?

What it means is so the height is going to be regulated by the MPUD um which we can bring will up to speak to the height really quick. Um but ultimately any development that takes place on on this site whether it's this type of development multif family or something else it will have to meet the uh land development code requirements for the airports running. So it'll control the height at this distance from the runways um you know a fourtory or threetory structure is not going to be um in the way of an airplane trying to land.

So so it's not an issue. I mean maybe four story but

it's within the influence area. So there are certain things that have to happen or rather I should say cannot happen. So they'll have to meet that. But from a height a purely height standpoint it's not as if the buildings are standing in the way of or yeah standing in the way of the runway itself. But uh if will want you want to mention the the MQD too vermillion plane development economic growth within this portion of the airport influence area. The maximum building height is 60 ft. The maximum building height for this project is 55 feet, five feet below.

How many stories is that?

Uh 55 feet would be a maximum when you look at like the pitch of the roof. A maximum of four stories uh would be for the 55 ft.

Well, we we don't have any fivetory multif family, do we? No. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Shelley Johnson, 6400 Madison Street. Um, I do have my team here today, Mike Razer, who um can answer any road questions, who is our traffic engineer, um, as well as Seth Bennett from Mike Galvin's office, um, who is one of the developers on this site. Um, as well as, um, Lance Bennett, who's our architect, who can answer any other additional questions. He's, I think, online uh, virtually, I hope. Um, just to give you a little bit of background on this parcel because I do think the planning history on it is relevant um, to today's hearing. Um, this parcel was part of what was known back in the early 2000s, Mr. Gagnis owned these part these parcels in this area for a while. Um, as the RX MPD West um, we had the RUX MPD West that we did and then we had the RX um, MPD East that we did in the city of Zephr Hills at the same time. Um, so the parcel's been around for a very long time from a planning perspective. Um, Rucks MPD West ultimately came became what you all know today now as Cobblestone. Um, and of course, you know, Cobblestone is has a town home and single family in it. That is the the property. If you're looking at the property, it's the obviously the developed property right directly to the south of this property. You also have right adjacent to Cobblestone on the other side of Deer Springs or on Crystal Springs Road um Deer Park which was I think it's got um I want to say like a 116 uh 50 foot lots in it. Um so that's a single family development as well. Of course, as staff's pointed out in their um in the in the discussions, everything to the north of this property is heavy mobile home density, a little bit older housing stock. Um, and I know that that those units from the calculations that have been done have actually developed out at about 14 units to to the acre. Um, so they're above that res 9 simply because they developed before that those designations actually went into place. Um, oh, okay. Yeah, if you could go to the next slide, that might be helpful, too. Um there's a lot of improvements that are being brought with this development that um otherwise you know will not happen um ultimately because this residential piece um to develop is going to have to do the significant improvement to Crystal Springs Boulevard um from its southern boundary to the terminus of Chanse. Um and that'll it'll it will be brought up to standard in accordance with what MI is doing to the south. There'll be a multi-use pro uh path on that road, a 10- foot multi-use path, a 5-ft sidewalk. Um the developer is also agreeing to put in a 10-ft sidewalk on the south side of Chanse along its northern boundary to connect to um [clears throat] uh the the the you know upgrades and stuff and uh the improvements that are going to be going on on 301. Um I did hear the question about my understanding on the FDOT improvement in the fourlane is that um ultimately again this property wouldn't

need that in order to develop. Um it will have to do the improvement to Crystal Springs Road. Um and I do have again our traffic engineer who can address those questions you know better than I can. But ultimately um when the my understanding is that the funding is not in place for the poor laning however they are at the top of the list in terms of um getting ready to go. So it is high in the list of occurrence. Um, I don't, you know, so I don't think it'll be years and years and years hopefully. Um, but that actually will also include that particular improvement that they're going to be doing will also include a 10-ft multi-use path on the west side and another 5-ft sidewalk on the east side. So, the pedestrian improvements and stuff will go all around the property. Um, we're going to have a shared access road with cobblestone and MI to the to the south. So, there's a lot of really great improvements that are coming along with it. Um, the reason I mention all of that is because ultimately, you know, there's only so much that can be done with this property because it is a transitioning property in between the non-residential and the residential in this area. Um, especially on the property itself. So, um, you know, the multifamily seem to be is, you know, the best uh, use for the property. There's a lot of really sight sensitive design criteria that we've added to the MP. I know we haven't gotten to that yet, but um, in terms of building orientation, buffering, all kinds of things like that. So, um, you know, I think it would be it's a good use for the property. It makes sense from a planning uh perspective and then it also allows for all these improvements to go in which, you know, otherwise can't occur. So, um, we have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them. question.

No, chair. It's not an exciting project, but I I don't disagree that it's it's it's not an inappropriate use based on Pedukco and the coffee flavor factory to the to the east, the densities to the west, and everything that's going on into this this this corridor. you know, it's not it's it's not an inappropriate use and it's it's it's appropriate, but it's nothing like super exciting to just give you that.

Well, let me ask you a question. You know, you used to talk about the word eeries and putting something more complex. Now, this is supposed to have, you know, fifth of the site supposed to be commercial anyway and this is a zone that now uh if we're just going to get straight apartments with all that density around it, I got to think that the commercial is still a viable property at least [snorts] to some degree. You know, the bottom floors are whatever.

We don't see any of that. There's nothing to draw people in. And you know, let's face it, you know, today I was going to get a cough drop cuz I had a little sore throat this morning and there was nothing in here. I might be able to help. Yeah, I'm up good enough. But there was nothing around here really to still get. So look around that whole area. You don't see a lot of commercial there either. And it doesn't have to be big commercial, but we should have some commercial use in there, especially in the bottom close like we've talked about many times. These these little projects we see, but there's nothing hit by apartments. I don't see why we would do that on this section. The road is so busy anyway. And if you actually going to be able to save some trips instead of creating little trips, I think it'd be a better use of the property. Mr.

No, I just thought I saw that the corner was commercial.

Yes. So the corners commercial that what happened with this site and I forgot to mention it and it is relevant. Um it ultimately for many many years they thought there was going to be an FDOT signal that was going to go in on 301 um to the access of this particular site. So a lot of the site for a long time we had a lot heavier entitlements on it. The last time that I worked on it um when it was part of cobblestone in 2018 it had almost 170,000 ft of commercial on it. Um ultimately what happened is FDOT for whatever reason moved that signal south. So, it is now at the m at the um residential entrance for the cobblestone MPD. When that happened, it completely changed the dynamics of the site for Mr. Galvin and Mr. Gagy. Um in regards to what it could be [clears throat] used for. Obviously, it could no longer be used for, you know, a heavy shopping plaza like a public shopping plaza or something of that nature. Just, you know, it's not going to work with the access without a signal. So, um I did forget to mention that and that I do think that is relevant, you know, with regards to the planning history on it.

I I do have a question,

Mr. Sure.

Um, looking at the map where it says G Boulevard, um, there's like this strip behind your parcel and [clears throat] north of the pond. What What is that? What's going on with that strip of land?

So, um, there originally this again was part of rocks and part um cobblestone. So, that is going to be a a shared access road with cobblestone. Um, I think it's called Stonywood is what I think it was identified as. [clears throat] Um and MI and the CDD of Cobblestone will ultimately put that road in. So there'll be landscape buffering and and things of that nature down there as well. So that'll be another nice improvement that'll come in with this.

Oh, okay. Yeah. Wasn't showing anywhere else.

Yeah.

So that is a culde-sac. That's a step out right there.

Yeah, it'll be a shared access road. Yep.

Okay. Looks wider than it needs needs to be. Are there homes along that road, too?

Um I think the layout of it was No. Yeah, the No, there I don't think there was on our side. No, there there may have been. Let me look at the site. says MMM. I don't know what that is. [laughter]

Okay. But it's

Yeah, I mean the build there'll be buildings oriented on our side towards that road and then obviously you know where wherever they stub out or you know and their residential lots which looks like right where they're at right now.

So you'll have access to your property from this road.

Yes.

Good. All right. So any questions? Okay. All right. Time for public comment from the phone to speak to the item.

I got one person please come forward.

Is there anyone?

No sir.

Cindy Buckle, five line three, Frontier Drive, Zapper Hills, Florida. I live the mobile home park that they're referring to is Forest Lake Estates. So, I live off of Gateway and County Road 54. adding any more traffic to Chansy Road or 301 and and like you said, there's been times that Chansy Road and 301 is blocked because that light was put there. It needed to be put there for the mobile home park on 301. Um, but 301 it literally is backed up past the Hillsboro County line and it's dangerous in the aspect that you have people that pass when they shouldn't. Um, I know I a lot of times when I'm coming in from an appointment, I cut through Meadow Point to get to 54. Otherwise, I sit through six or seven lights at that intersection. So commercial is fine. I mean, everything out there is pretty much commercial, and we're okay with that. We're okay with the steel and and we've got Century Boats and all of that out there and and the bakery, but adding apartments is going to put so many more vehicles on the road. I don't know how how those roads are going to handle that. And I know there's plans to widen them. I I understand that. and that's great, but it's not going to happen before these apartments are done and those cars are on the road. So, I'm I'm asking if there's any way that this could be looked at a little harder as far as with the airport. Um, those planes do fly low sometimes, but since the bakery's been put in there, they're flying a little higher, but the traffic is a concern. Um, right now we have a very hard time just pulling out of gateway on the county road 54 because it's being used as a thorough affair from 98 to 301 for people coming from Lakeland to work here and vice versa. So that's the only worry I have about it. It's just added traffic.

Thank you.

Anyone here from the audience would like to speak to this item?

Anyone?

No, sir. to the board.

Roll call.

Second.

I said it's roll call vote. I didn't vote. I didn't make a motion.

Oh, I thought you said move approval.

I asked if this was a roll call vote.

Okay.

Yes, it is a roll call vote.

Move approval. Well, you want businesses to move out there, but the people can't live any

No, I mean, like I said, it's not an inappropriate use.

It's not an inappropriate use.

It's just congested. It's just congested. Public comment essentially said it's not an inappropriate use. It's just going to compound existing, you know, flow challenges until DOT gets to work on this. segment and there is a piece of commercial to it. I mean it it fits

commercial has more traffic.

It fits the it fits, you know, the transition model and with what's coming on to the east. It's not inappropriate. I'll second further discussion.

Yeah. to the motion.

Well, I I was just going to say that and we have a traffic person sitting in the audience or staff could say I thought commercial generated more traffic than than resident.

Good afternoon. William Vermillion Planning Development Economic Growth Commissioner Starky would be correct in terms of the trip generation per thousand square feet compared to multif family in this case.

Um I actually have a question. I thought that um DOT I thought they had money for 301. Is that just part of 301?

It's getting lightened.

William Vermillion back again. So there there has there's an MPU presentation that hadn't been heard yet that's a companion to the CPA in which I was going to talk about FDOT's design of 301. It is the top priority of the long range uh transportation plan cost feasible with DOT and Pasco County trying to work on the widening of the fourlane in terms of its top priority for funding. The design's already done. This would be getting 180 ft total for that four-lane widening here as a part of this project as well as improving the parallel reliever road of Crystal Springs up to Chanse and the subsequent pedestrian improvements there. Um

so improves the traffic in the area. Well, so I wouldn't say that it would be a capacity improvement for Crystal Springs because the lanes aren't actually expanding. It's u it's an improvement to the roadways condition right now, but currently it's substandard. Um it would add pedestrian facilities as well as you know actual mil and ser mill and surfaced roadway. Not necessarily capacity. It currently does serve as a parallel reliever. It would just be able to better function and it's improved capacity. to answer your question. D is fun of design but not construction.

Okay. Well,

Mr. I just wanted to add something to the start.

When we formed the uh regional MB 301 there where we're talking right now that needs to be four length that all the way to Hillsburg County

is something we worked together on. I heard that Hills County was on board the same as we are now about getting that four line. Hopefully it happened sooner than not, but it's it's really a backlog of traffic there. And there was some terrible accident right in front of that mobile home park right there on 301 between there from Chachu to 56 right out in the center. There's a mobile home there. People were getting killed going out on the road. It was dangers.

Is that where they moved the light to?

Yeah, that's where I got the light. You know, FDOT. I just remember um DOT coming to the MPO meeting and saying they found some money for rural highways

because I I was kind of shocked that that it jumped 52.

That was a northern that was a northern portion of 301.

Oh, the northern portion.

Let me let me bring this to a lot of times we'll hear land use in the companion MPUD. Right now I'm just a [clears throat] thing that's going to get to me. I'm not going to go with it. But if you want to hear from the uh MPD, we can bring that forward

before you vote on this one.

Just hear them together.

At this point, there's conversation going on. The chair asked about the MPV that

Okay. Yeah. Bring it up.

All right. Good with the board.

All right. Let's go. Let's go to the opinion item.

Okay. So, we have a motion in a second. So, I have to do something. Um

table for now.

Who's our parliamentary? Is that you? Are you the motion maker comfortable tableling?

I will table this for now.

Okay.

Which item is

what's the companion?

What number is it

looking right now? Could be 55.

55.

All right.

Look to a presentation on 55. So P55 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times June 24th, 2026 and by affidative of certified mailings and site postings. This is the zoning amendment for the Gagy MPD, the companion item to the the previously discussed comprehensive plan amendment. Looks like this is still the CPA presentation. This is the right title, but then you go into ordinance there and it's for the CPA

by memory.

I don't know. They they keep pulling up the the CPA PowerPoint set of the MPD. I'm just

waiting on

You got him nervous after last last meeting. [panting]

He's a little gunshy up there.

Yeah, I know, right? [laughter]

Look at him. Don't Don't dive into that.

He's duck. Look, he goes duck behind that.

I got I got I got the vest on underneath the shirt. Don't worry. Oh yeah, let me check back. Fantastic. Thank you, Mr. Cyerson. This is the the companion resoning request to the previously presented comprehensive plan amendment to res 24 from res 9. The NPD seeks to entitle 300 multif family apartments and 30,000 square feet of commercial on approximately 18 acres at the before mentioned location southside of Chansy Road on the east side of G Boulevard. the current zoning. Uh like Miss Johnson said, the previous site of the expired Rucks MPD with the cobblestone MPD to the south, which is currently being built out by MI Homes. This is the MPD master plan, which shows um the driveway access on 301, the shared access with the residential neighborhood um as you make your way out to Crystal Springs. But more informatively is the binding concept plan for the multif family units. Here you can see that the the applicant worked with um [clears throat] with staff here. Uh Mr. Galvin Bennett and uh Miss Johnson worked with staff here for the building orientation of the multif family. You can see that most of the parking is internal shielded by the buildings. Um the bulk of the buildings oriented to the uh to the east west roadway to the south as you make your way to Crystal Springs which will be improved from the southern terminus up to the intersection of Chanse Boulevard with the the proper pedestrian facilities the pathway both on Crystal Springs on the portion of uh Chanse Road uh on the southern piece and then ultimately a part of FDOT's widening of G Boulevard. uh the C centralized amenity also shielded by the buildings. There are conditions of approval um about how the non-residential you should form up in relation to that northern uh multifamily piece. There's specific conditions of approval which talk about the building orientation of the non-residential use as well and how how they can use the access way there um to act as screening for the parking for the non-residential use away from the multif family as well. The applicant uh worked with the CDD attorney for the neighborhood to the south. Um they will be responsible for putting in pedestrian flashers and speed bumps along that north south road of the adjacent CDD. Uh the neighbors were concerned about traffic coming through their neighborhood as it they share the same internal access road but that this uh this development will be putting in some of those pedestrian safety measures at their own cost. This comes with a recommendation of approval with conditions from the planning commission planning development economic growth. I'm available for more for more additional questions that the board may have questions, comments change much of opinion to me. Um I'm looking at that commercial piece.

It's It says it's 30,000 square feet of commercial, but that footprint looks very similar to what was on the map before. Maybe it just shows differently. But I'm wondering why it wouldn't hang to more commercial. Just even that last piece of apartment right there could be much more viable for an eery or some type of fun place for people to go if it was set up differently. But that one last apartment building in there just takes away even more of a viability of what commercial could be in a positive way.

All right. For the applicant,

I think it's a good plan. Do you want me to do the swear in procedures since we're

um Yes. Yes, we can do the swearing in for anyone speaking.

Okay. So if for anyone that's speaking on this item or any future item if you are going to speak um will you stand to be sworn in? Please raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give is a truce so help you God.

Thank you. Thank you. Shelley Johnson again 6400 Madison Street and I have been sworn. Um I again we're here to answer any questions. I mean ultimately the reason that the commercial is where it is is there's an actual comm designation over that. um the 30,000 square feet is what they ultimately have determined could, you know, potentially work on that site. One thing to keep in uh I think is really relevant um on the commercial is there's actually a wellhead. Um so there's only so much of that commercial property that can actually be utilized. It has to be set back you know uh farther from the wall head than you know if it was sitting there and the wall head wasn't in the vicinity. So, um, it there's only so much of it that can actually be utilized under the county ordinances, which is also, you know, kind of stying how much commercial can go there in addition to losing that access, you know, along the way, um, you know, to be able to have even heavier commercial. So, um, you'll see that the access is, you know, going out to Crystal Springs Road and then they'll have the shared access with the the multif family will have the shared access with the cobblestone to the south. So,

I I have a question,

M. Um, I can't tell from the map, but um, where's the nearest multif family complex to this?

Um, if you pull up my PowerPoint, it's the very last page um, of my PowerPoint that I sent in. Um,

and it has the five mile radius um, of where and you can see and you did have a study done. You had the Florida housing report that was done in 2025. And as you can see, what the map I think actually conveys this is that the east side um and Tripoli in the Luchi area even further east um there's really a shortage of multif family housing um and that was from you know your own Florida housing report from 2025. So um and you can see much of the some of it some of this in the five mile radius is built some of it is not but you can see most of it goes you know is further west um and then of course further north up uh 301. Yeah, [clears throat] there's

so there's little there's little multif family housing. You know, your your east market transition or east market policy area, you know, calls for, you know, trying to in this area to put develop development along your corridors, which is what they're trying to do. Um, and to also try to maintain some affordable housing, you know, quality housing for, you know, affordable housing for for workers and employees and that kind of thing, which obviously this multif family site would service. So,

yeah, that's why I'm important. Wait, Mr. Chair Shelley, um, we didn't realize that we were not going to have a full board until late yesterday. So, I just want to make sure you're aware that we don't have a full board and you need three votes to approve this. Are you sure you want to proceed today with a vote?

Um, I can talk to my client about it. I think I think so. Um, you know, we've been in the process for a long time on this, so

I just want to make sure you want to proceed.

Yeah, let me ask him really quick.

Okay. Sorry about that. Would we be [clears throat] able to continue it to the next board hearing versus another 30 days or

Before we go, we have a little bit more discussion since we're we're doing this. Wait,

Shel, if you go back to whichever slide had showed the layup. There we go.

Based on the wellhead,

I don't based on the wellhead there. on the commercial piece and what Commissioner Mariano [cough and clears throat] was alluding to. If you square off the triangle and remove the multif family box that's on the north side that you know butts the commercial piece. That's what you were getting at, right? Correct. to give you more flexibility to work around the wellhead that's there and add more commercial and then you'd have essentially you know a much broader opportunity for a mixeduse node with a very similar layout.

Um I can we can definitely you know talk about that um with the client. I will tell you that um I don't know that the comm parcel because there's only so much of this parcel that has the comm designation and the rest has residential. Um

well I think it might based on what we're hearing it might be worth the ask or exploring because this is a unique location.

It's not inappropriate. There are traffic concerns with DOT. you know, seems like you're on the brink of of of finding some level of a compromise for for use here that's not inappropriate and you're getting the best of both worlds.

Yeah. And I do hear you. I mean, that's definitely something we can go back and talk about if we're going to be continuing. So,

they probably would have to revertise though because the only advertised plan amendment is from RES9 to res 24.

That's fine. I can revertise it.

All right. So, to talk a little further to it, you could pretty much take your line squared from that thin piece that's there, draw it across. So, the triangle just goes right across. [clears throat] And then if you wanted to look at something, maybe it was in the commercial where you had some structures down below.

There's a wheel

and put a level of building above it or something like that. Something like that could work. You'd lose that one building, but you'd pick up a lot more commercial. and uh I'll be much more prone to be favorable to that than I am right now.

Yeah, we can definitely look at that. I'm not sure and I'll have to we'll have to measure it to see how far that that comm parcel goes down. Um and we'll go from there because obviously that's where it would have to be at. So

it m

Yeah. Where's the wellhead on this property you're talking about?

Um I think it's and I have not looked at in a long time. It's across the street. It's a fiveyear wellhead I think.

Across the street? Yeah, across the street on the other side of 301 is what my memory asserted about it. But um it does impact the setback on the commercial property. Um it does force some further setback in terms of the utilization.

Is it a public well?

Um no.

What is that?

I think it's one of the one of your main wellheads. I think it's a fiveyear.

I apologize. I didn't pull the information on that. So

anybody know if it's fire? But we can definitely, you know, look at um moving see where we can move that line further south. I can talk to the client to Mr. Galin about it for sure.

Okay.

So, Shelley, if you need to revertise, do you need more than a 30-day [clears throat] continuance, I guess, is the question. Or I guess I'll ask staff the same question. if it if they're going to look to revertise this. How long of a continuence do you all need?

There it is.

David Engel, Planning, Development, Economic Growth. So on that map that's on your presentation board, that turquoise blue area is the wellhead protection area and it shows the penetration into the commercial portion of this property. Uh on the continuence uh

what's that?

I just had discussions with Mr. PTOs and we were looking [clears throat] for uh October 9th as the continued hearing date

and we do we are requesting a re readvertising and renotice.

So you feel like you can readvertise and make that date? That's my question. Can we advertise whatever it is?

We we should have enough time to advertise for the October date city meeting.

Okay.

To readvertise as from a planning standpoint. We'll take a look at whatever the uh applicants come back with.

Okay. So, back to item P46. I did have a motion in a second. Do we want to withdraw that motion in second? I'll change that motion to move to continue to the October. What was the date we set it on?

He said night, but it's you have a date.

October 6th.

October 6th meeting.

Second. And let's go to the second as well. Okay.

All right.

Roll call continuence.

You don't need a roll call on a continuence. No.

All in favor say I.

I. I

Okay. And then for item P55, we have a motion to continue the same day.

Move.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Okay.

Okay. Item P47, which is also matched up with P 56. So, we'll do 40 47 first.

Oh,

47.

You mean was it wasn't that just 47? No, that was 46. Okay. P47 was advertised in Tampa Bay Times April 22nd, 2026 and by affidavit served by mailings and site postings. Good. Good afternoon. Robert Irving, Planning Development, Economic Growth. P47 is um an ordinance amending the comprehensive the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan text amendment to sub area policy flu 7.1.11 two rivers and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repealer severability and effective date and before I get too into it two things I want to note is one that we received expartes post the publishing of of the agenda that have been sent to the clerk's office. And then the other thing I want to mention is following the transmitt hearing that occurred on 7:14, we distributed the transmitt packet to all the state agencies and given this project boundary to the south of Hillsboro County. This was distributed to them as well. We received comments back from Hillsboro County which were attached to the agenda packet. We did respond to Hillsboro County, but these comments were not part of the attachments of the agenda. So, we have those to submit to the clerk as well. these out. So, this proposal is a comprehensive plan text amendment policy flu 7.1.112 to Rivers PD to allow for an increase in residential dwelling units and non-residential entitlements on approximately 3,400 acres and the subject site is located on the north and south side of state road 56 spanning from Morris Bridge Road to G Boulevard US 31. and the subary policy as mentioned at nauseium. Now this policy for 7.112 rivers PD and there will be a companion MPUD resoning herd after this which is RZ7856. So here's the location. The subject site's located in the South Market area within the urban service area. And here's just an overall location map again just showing the overall boundaries of the two rivers speed. Now here's a context map just again giving more of a in-depth detailed view of the total boundaries. So you'll see on the western most there'll be Morris Bridge Road running north south. Then there's Two Rivers Boulevard which is internal. Following east from there, there's Coloulston Avenue and then G Boulevard boulevard on the subject s eastern boundary with state road 56 running through the middle. And you'll see two other roads on the northeast corner of this map. Lodgerass Boulevard which will be taken from where you see the G Boulevard logo right there all the way up and then Coats Road as well. So just kind of give some background as to what this proposal is doing and what the text amendments are. That's what this slide is demonstrating. So I will note too that you'll see some of the entitlements here will differ from the next presentation on the MPU and that's due to the fact that the sub area policy allows for land use equivalency matrix

to occur many of which have occurred where the comp plan entitlements in the text itself have remained the same. So part of this is a cleanup to be consistent with the existing land use equivalency matrix that have occurred and also to allow for an increase in entitlements. Do

you have a copy of that land matrix?

Yes, we do have a copy. Um so the main thing that you'll see here is under the single family residential. You'll see that it appears as though it's increasing to 4,47 but it's not. In fact, that's to reflect the prior land use equivalency matrix. And on the multif family residential line, you'll see that it's changing from 1400 to 2500. But again, reflecting previous land use equivalency matrix, that actual number is approximately 1,600. And then you'll when we go down to the age restricted residential, you'll see that they're removing those entitlements entirely, which there's only 209 remaining at this point. So of the overall increase in multif family, 133 of those become trip neutral. And the request is for an additional 766 multif family units which when my colleague presents the MPU will provide more detail as to how many units can be achieve what type of units and more detail to that. The other components of this proposal are to add 300 assisted living facility beds, 480 hotel rooms, 705 square ft of retail, and add a water park not to exceed 35 acres. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following comprehensive plan policies. Section flu A6 PD plan development. Policy flu 7.11 Two Rivers PD. Policy flu 8.1.2 South Market Area Establishment. Policy flu 1.8.7 economic development policy flu 1.8.10 preservation of capacity for employment generating uses policy HSG 1.1.2 comprehensive plan amendments and policy ED 1.7.2 to promote tourism expansion and this comes to you with a recommendation to adopt the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and ordinance but we'll call a vote if you have any questions I'm available

any questions

how many apartments are in this this project

so overall or with this

change

no just this this

just apartments itself

well we're talking are we talking about just the north side of uh 56 six.

So, in the conditions of approval of the the new ask, only 240 of the multifamily entitlements can be apartments, but there's also other stipulations with that which my colleague will get into in the following presentation.

Okay. I think he's asking how many apartments total are there right now?

Built right now. I I would have to defer to the applicant. There's dozens upon dozens of site plans that have come in. So, the number is changing quickly. All right. But the initial approval was for,400.

In 2008, the sub area was 1,400 multif family units.

Now they want to go to 2500.

Yes, that is correct. But the the number today reflecting the land use equivalency matrix that have occurred would be about 1,600 on the multif family units.

Yeah, I um I have an issue with this one mainly because same issues I had with the other one. We're we're dumping right out on Fit Six, but you're at the end of Fit Six and you're right there at 301. It's a two-lane road. Everything you can't go back the other way and go to Morris Bridge and get around it because Morris Bridge is packed. So, they have real a lot of issues with infrastructure right around the edge of this this project. And there's a lot of numbers and a lot of houses all being built on the south side. This Okay. Any other questions for staff?

I wait. Yeah. Okay. Mr.

Uh, Clark Hobby, Hobby and Abby, PA, 109 North Brush Street, Tampa, Florida. I've been sworn. I think I'll I just want to say a couple of things. Uh, but then I want to call Steve Henry up. I think maybe there's a little bit of confusion about a couple of traffic improvements in this area and it wasn't our point to mention them in the previous hearing. Uh, and the board needs to understand some of this, but we already had 6,400 units approved under the comp plan, which is the first agenda item you're looking at here. All we're doing is ending up with 6,547. We're net adding 147 units from what the existing comp plan policies are. Now, we can talk about the apartments and the MPUD, but the net ad on the multifamily is much more about getting town houses, duplexes, and other project uh needed uses like that. And we can have a greater discussion about the apartments, but we're net adding when you look at the MPU conditions only 240 units. So, can I bring Mr. Henry up to talk about the transportation? One one thing for clarification though, aren't we losing a bunch of age restricted single family as well?

Most of those have already been converted. My my only point is staff is what staff is trying to explain to you is there some of their presentation is about what has been converted or for trip neutral purposes. I'm toing I'm only talking about the gross number of units that were originally approved which was 6,400. This is 6,400 to now 6547. The total number of units. Yes, they're different breakdown of units. No question. I'm not saying they're trip equal. I'm just saying it's only a net 147 units compared to what was originally approved.

But the way they did the loom for the for the switch out, they treated it very differently than they would do nowadays. You took age restricted units and keep keep them the same type of count with the apartments,

right? and and town homes are no longer in and there's more apartments as well. So, it's a it's a big shift in the quality character of the project where there's so many town homes, so many age restricted and now it's [clears throat] those are gone and now it's all apartments.

Well, uh no, we didn't actually net lose any town houses to do that. It was only age restricted to to some of the apartments. For sure. And and I understand your point.

916.

Uh yes. Right. on on that 960 for sure. There's no question about that. But let me because I want to have Mr. Henry

916

single family homes or

Yeah, they were single family but age restricted.

Okay. So we lost 916 age. So what some whole esplanade or something is gone,

right?

And you're putting apartments in instead.

They have been used for apartments and other uses. I I have to look at the breakdown. But let me have Mr. Henry talk about the traffic because I think that's really key. and then we can circle back on the other.

Steve Henry, uh, TMC 5023 West, Tampa 33607. So, we have been working with DOT on the the 30156 um, um, geometry and in fact, DOT currently has uh, under design right now four laning of 301 from 56 to Chanse Road. they that is it's an intram four-lane project that they're working on scheduled for construction in 2029. Um, as a part of that, they are uh they don't have the ability in their plans to do a eastbound left turn lane, dual left turn lane at 56 and 301. So, this developer has committed to building that turn lane today so that it will be there when the DOT comes in and does their pro their project. So to help the overall capacity of that intersection, uh in in addition on Morris Bridge to the from 56 south is already um is a development agreement being done to fourlane that section of roadway to tie into the northern section of Morris Bridge, which this project is is uh providing a a funding for that. Um has actually been pulling the funds for for that improvement. So there are improvements that are in in the works in in that area that will help the overall capacity and operation of the area.

Are they funded or just being designed?

The my understanding from D is that the fourlaning of 301 is funded and will be construct and is budgeted for construction in 2029. and Morris Bridge.

Morris Bridge to the south is is already development agreement under construction. To the north, again, we we this development has been pulling the funds for that. Uh in the event that the county doesn't move forward fast enough to be able to build it, then this developer has already pulled the money in their mobility fees to be able to fund that improvement.

Talking about the talking about the construction FDOT starting in 29, you say? Yes, correct.

And how long will that take for them to build that

so that it would be open to handle the traffic?

Five more years.

No, I would say it's probably that's probably a 18 to 24 monthth period to build that roadway. Build that section of roadway. It's only from again it's from 56 to Chansy Road.

Oh, just that section, right?

Just that section. That's correct.

The intersection.

Yes, [clears throat] that includes the intersection. that that's that that is their intram improvement to fix that particular problem. Now, obviously, they have a larger project that they're working on, [clears throat] but but that is their interim improvement to help the intersection of 56 and 301 and also Chansy and 301. I I just want to make sure what everyone's understanding what Mr. Henry is saying. The DOT now has a committed project to take the worst section and construct the improvements to it, including fixing the intersection at Chansy and 301. I didn't know that until today. That is the biggest problem in the whole area. That's what causes it to back up everywhere. The intersection doesn't have left turn lanes. It doesn't have longer right turn lanes. So, I'm very heartened that DOT is actually doing that. That's a big deal. So, if I might, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted you all to be aware of the transportation issues. I just want to remind the board about the project and the bigger scheme. The South Market area was created in large part because of the wire grass project, the Mitchell's project, Starky, and this project. And it was designed spec specifically for the creation of high density compact mixeduse location with maximized transportation opportunities to attract a broad spectrum of uh businesses and employers. And it promotes density compact development and encourages mixeduse communities that are live uh work. And that's what we're trying to do here. We need the commercial that we're seeking on this thing. We've provided a market study to the county and we simply do not have anywhere near enough commercial in this project or in this area to serve the needs that this project and others uh already show that they need. We want to take a rip uh and and do this project on the surf park. We believe it's going to be regionally significant and a national tourist draw and be good for the community. And I would remind the board that this project through the search charges that are being imposed paid for the majority of lanes three and four of the the 56 extension all the way from Edto Point here. So if this project wasn't building out, we wouldn't be able to do that. Then I also want to remind the board that and this is a big differentiator for Two Rivers. Unlike VOP, unlike Connected City, unlike Angeline and a couple of other projects, this project paid for all of its own water sewer and reclaim water mains to extend them from way off site. We have built about 5 miles of onsite vision roads. We have paid already about $7 million in search charges for 56. And the project's already banked about seven or eight million dollars to be used for the Morris Bridge widening. So it will be fourlaned essentially for the whole stretch of the the Pasco County portion. And in addition to that, it will pay about another 40 million in mobility fees. We've done all this stuff and not sought any county funding or assistance with all this. We're a huge economic driver and there's a lot of good from

this project. And so what I'm asking the board to do on is to approve the comp plan amendment that you transmitted. Let's talk about in the MPU portion. We can talk about the apartments themselves, but we need the remainder of the approval so that the water park, the surf park can be built. We need the more hotel rooms and we can you know discuss the apartments themselves but we have a need for more town houses uh in the project and other attached product and some of the more urban walkable areas that we're trying to create. So we can't create the urban walkable hide park type areas without having some more town houses and some of those other products. I'm happy to answer any other questions you may have.

Any questions? Um what uh sorry with the surf park, doesn't this have some tie in to the surf park?

Yeah, the and we'll get to that in the MPU. Okay.

We cannot have any more apartments for other than what we already have with the entitlements we already have without the surf part actually being built.

Yeah. So

So no surf park, no more apartments. Do we want to do we want to take the companion up with this one like we did last time because that's that's the big

that might help the board.

We do chair

for clarity staff or Mr. Hobby. This is once again one of these projects where multif family has two different meanings

right

and I think you should that needs to be shared for the record. Yeah. And I

of that definition. This happens.

It's a unique definition depending on the project.

This this project for some reason when it started well before I was involved, uh Mr. Sheridan's here today and he started working on some of the stuff years ago, staff coded and working with the original applicant before Eisenhower Properties was even involved. All of the product except single single family detached on the residential side is all called multifamily. That doesn't mean they're all apartments. That includes duplexes, uh single family ownership, uh cottages and stuff like that if they're attached. Anything that is not single family detached is called u uh multif family in this project. And that's misleading cuz it makes it sound like we're adding like two more apartment projects or more. And that is not the case. All we're asking for is the right to have more duplexes and town houses. And I and I've showed the board in other presentations and I'll show more in the MPU side. We're trying to build like some fourstory town houses in a downtown area that are very innovative. We don't have them here. They're upscale. This is not entrylevel living as I'll explain in the MPUD. So do not get confused in the MPUD, the comp plan amendment side that we're just trying to get a rush to more entrylevel town houses or build random apartments. That is not the case. The only reason we even are seeking the apartments at all is we think when the surf park is built, we can create a really really cool urban walkable mixeduse area immediately adjacent to it. But I'm happy to discuss this more uh after the presentation on the the MPUD if that would help.

Let me any more questions for Mr. Hobby?

I think it would be helpful to hear the MPD.

All right. Let me just uh Is there anyone from the public want to speak to this land use item?

No one signed up.

No one signed up. Okay. So, let's go move to the MPD staff staff present first.

All right. So, that is P-56, correct?

P56. Yes.

All right. So P-56 was advertised in Tampa Bay Times April 22nd, 2026 and by [clears throat] affidavit of certified millings and site postings. Good afternoon William Vermillion Planning Development Economic Growth. The aforementioned companion MPD resoning. This is actually a substantial modification to the existing Two Rivers MPD. The companion to the CPA text amendment. The county location map as Mr. Irving pointed out down on the south side of uh 56 headed towards Countyline Road in between Hillsboro. The purpose of this substantial amendment is to increase the maximum development potential to 4,047 single family detached units. A total of 200 multif family units, 1.3 million square ft of office target industry, 1.3 million ft² of light industrial, 1.3 million square ft of retail, 300 beds for assisted living, 480 hotel rooms, and a 35 acre recreational water park on approximately 3,45 acres. This is within southeast Pasco County on the north and south side of State Road 56. all the way from Morris Bridge to G Boulevard. Now, there there's a lot there's a lot in the in the packet in the memo about mixeduse parcel C, mixeduse parcel A. So what this map tries to do here is to highlight in red which of the actual portions of the MPD through the substantial amendment would be receiving the increase of either intensity or density through the increase of the non-residential entitlement or through the increase of the residential entitlement. So you can see that the majority of this is concentrated along the 56 corridor where the increase of density intensity is the most appropriate as well as at the intersection of Coloulston and Two Rivers as you move into the more neighborhood style mixeduse development internal. Um this is consistent with the urban service area that was adopted by the board um to concentrate the intensity and density along our capital improvement project that happened. The board will remember that this project was instrumental in the the expansion of State Road 56 out to 301. Um, Two Rivers was a large part of that originally, [clears throat] as well as the impound account for the Morris Bridge improvements from the north side of 56 up to Chanse, as well as South Hillsboro County line to State Road 56, where improvements are already underway through a development agreement that was approved uh earlier this year with the River Landing MPU. Again, this shows the parcels being affected, but we'll skip forward a little bit to some more color here. These are the various mixed use and residential parals of the existing master plan. And as I click forward, there's a some slight changes in the acreages that happened which resulted in an in the applicant asking for an increase of density or intensity. So as

we as we move forward to the proposed master plan, one of the first things that increased the net developable acreage was the school site which is shown in blue and the county park site which is shown in green. So originally contemplated the school site and the county park site were originally larger when the acquisition actually happened. There was some some land that was retained by the applicant in this case which freed it up for development space which you can see reflected in an increase in acreage there. The pointer works for me on parcel L and also on mixed use parcel test in my vision. I believe that's M. And up here in the blue you can see the addition of where the the water park would be going up here on the extension of Coats Road. Well, question.

Yes, sir.

So, the county park parcel, how come we didn't get more land? We just decide we didn't need it or

Sure. Originally, it was 98 acres. The the county park ended up acquiring 85. So, we had a 13 acre delta. Um, to be fully transparent, I don't know the reason that the the actual purchase and sale agreement differed between 98 98 and 85 since parks negotiated that um outside of PTE. I don't know if somebody from parks is here that can add some color to that or the applicant.

And then originally the the school site went from 76 to uh 26 acres which freed up an additional 50. So, as we move forward here into the connectivity plan, we can see the parallel reliever roads to State Road 56 to Morris Bridge into 301, which is important. Um, you know, before Mr. Henry um added some color to the improvements that are actually budgeted for construction in fiscal year 29 on on 301. Part of the reason that that staff and the applicant worked on this connectivity plan was to create an internal network of reliever roads both vehicularly and that were focused on moving pedestrians outside of walking along the major thoroughare. So you can see here you have Coloulston Avenue traversing here east west which connects to County Line Road South. The particular segment of County Line Road South here is um taken directly from the construction plans that were submitted to Hillsboro County. staff felt like it was important to add to this connectivity plan because it sheds color on the connectivity that's going to be happening between the northern portion of Two Rivers, which resides in Pasco County, and the southern portion, which is being developed in Hillsboro County. Along County Line Road, you have the 10-ft multi-use path. Then as you move north on Two Rivers Boulevard north south, you have the the 12oot multi-use path running up to State Road 56 with its existing 12ft path, 12ft path on large grass and a 12ft path as well on Coloulston as well as moving uh further north, you have those paths that extend on the north side of state road 56 as well as the state pedestrian flashers which were required in the original approval to be installed. installed here around access point F as you make your way to the school site. [snorts] Also here to mention in yellow along the southern boundary there's an existing um utility easement in gold which is going to be a 20 foot unpaved path which bifurcates.

Do we know that's happening?

Yes ma'am. I'm going to ask the applicant to confirm that that is 100% happening.

100% happening. And a part of this we also

in in the in the TCO corridor.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

In the TCO corridor.

I just want to see that in writing. I want it in writing.

Commissioner Scott, you unpaved path. Are you okay with that?

Yeah.

Okay.

I I I got my full suspension off-road bike. [laughter]

Wheels going electric

wheels going to need two vest. Will rides a road bike, so I'd be on County Line Road South on the pave trail.

So,

three roundabouts down there, too, by the way.

Huh?

Three Three roundabouts down to the south.

Oh, that's good. Yeah.

So, as Mr. Hobby was stating um whenever we whenever I skip forward here to the full entitlement slide and that we see the difference from the existing MPD as it is currently to what's being proposed today. One of the differences being the increase in multif family entitlement which commissioner weightman pointed out in Pasco County it's a little peculiar because multif family includes both town homes, duplexes, garden style apartments. So a lot of times on these original approvals you you're given a multif family entitlement pot but they're actually used for different types of end end product types of residential. So, in this case, in the new MPD modification before you today, staff and the applicant specifically dictated the difference in entitlement number between town home and attached product and garden style multif family product, including a cap on the new residential units being sought at 240 uh garden style apartments as the maximum that could be sought as a part of the increase in multif family. The rest would be duplexes, town homes, but the 240 apartments couldn't be quote unquote unlocked or used until the water park receives its certificate of occupancy. If it doesn't receive the certificate of occupancy, those garden style apartments don't come to fruition. What's cool about this is as a part of that, the applicant worked with staff on building orientation should the garden style apartments be built with the water park to include building orientation, pedestrian connectivity, um parks and open space, shading requirements, and we also came up with this alternative typical section to be used for the apartment complexes, which allows the buildings to be oriented onto this alternative typical section which has two 10-ft paths on either side um which really allows the pedestrians to flow between the different mixeduse developments. The remainder would be able to be used on town homes and the additional town homes have a large maximum size which is 24 ft in width and they can either be rearloaded or they can be loaded onto a green space uh in the backyard. Those are the only two options for the additional town homes. 24 feet wide, rear loaded or loaded onto the uh onto the green space in the backyard. So, as we move forward, this is the the large existing entitlement sheet that I was speaking about before to be more I think this is a little bit more clear than the CPA side where in the land use there's a total number of dwelling units total. This is the actual breakdown of the current MPUD after all the looms have been used since 2008 to now. the the main thing um is the addition of the multif family units, the reduction in the single family detached age restricted units which had been done previously um via the uh the multiple looms that have occurred over the past few years which Commissioner Mariano pointed out. Um one of those looms was 916 single family detached age units went towards um town homes, other single

family detached and multif family. um in terms of the tripneutral conversion, right? The next thing is the increase in retail, which is it roughly doubles the amount of current retail um being allowed, the addition of assisted living facility, the addition of 480 hotel rooms and the obviously the addition of the recreational water park at a maximum of 35 acres. Now, this leads to a net density. Previously it was 2.38 it would now be 2.66. So around.3 dwelling units an acre difference net in this development. So as we move forward one of the things that as the project went through planning commission that the planning commission required was a binding concept plan for the water park. So the applicant supplied the to supplied to PD two different binding concept plans based on their different end users for the style of water park and their technologies. Um this being the first I couldn't tell you a whole lot about the technology. Um I'm sure Mr. Tony's here can speak to it. Here is the second one. um just a little bit different of a pool layout, but these are plans that are codified in the conditions and attached to your packet that are binding for the surf park. In the conditions, we there are minimums of the number of support commercial that needs to be located with the surf park as well as which is inclusive of both retail and restaurant as well as a minimum number of hotel units that needs to be accomplished in conjunction with the surf park. There's one variation after this very long-winded presentation from 805.6 um the requirement to establish a CDD HOA. If it's a multif family or a non-residential partial under single ownership, they're requesting that um the maintenance entity maintain the open space and common areas.

I I do have a question. Absolutely.

Yeah. Can you go back to the two site plans?

Yes, ma'am. Um the one thing that I want to be sure of is that there is safe pedestrian or you know [snorts] multimodal access to the parks besides you know driving up the road with all the cars. I I can't there may be I just can't tell it in these diagrams. So you know you may have residents who are annual members and the kids go there all the time and I want want them to be able to get in there safely. So

absolutely I think that that's something we can adjust on the concept plan or adjust in the conditions of approval to require this comes with the a recommendation of approval from planning development economic growth and the planning commission um subject to the conditions of approval attached and I'm available for any questions. Well

just uh show first quick question. So we're work the county is working through its golf cart rules. Um this is a golf cart friendly community.

Yes sir. The county engineers here um but in the past you know specifically the golf cart ordinance um it kind of started in VOP and connected city as those were the first areas that were really trying to be golf friendly communities. But what we what we determined was that a 10-ft path can accommodate a golf cart in the absence of allowing it on a roadway if the posted speed limit is too high. So in all these roads in the connectivity plan, you're looking at minimum of 10 feet for the paths. Most of them are 12.

Just irregardless of whether we have what county engineers working on or not, folks are going to have golf carts.

And uh the it's there's really no way to police that, right? So, we might as well just accept that folks are going to have golf carts and they're going to use them and and and incorporate and anticipate folks traveling around uh in those things.

Absolutely. Absolutely. We we certainly are anticipating that with the various multi-use paths. I think the only place that they'd run into any trouble is anytime you cross a dot road um try to cross 56. We had it out in, you know, water grass when you try to cross a dot road out there. That's generally the only place that um the policing becomes prevalent because of the safety issue.

Well, you have to go through a process to cross a state road.

Yes, ma'am.

Um are we going to see from the applicant where this walkable multi- where these walkable town homes are that that area?

I believe so. I believe the applicant has renderings and most of this

ready to go. Mr. Thank you. I'm going to run through this PowerPoint and I just want to

Mr. Bobby, for the record, can you state if you were sworn?

Yes, Clark Hobby and yes, I've been sworn. So, uh, I'll run through this, uh, PowerPoint quickly and I'm going to leave some time for Tony when I'm done, but I'll circle back on a few things. A lot of planning effort has gone into Two Rivers over many years. It's a legacy land uh piece of land, a beautiful piece of land and our client Eisenhower property has spent millions and preserving the beautiful parts of the property and enhancing it. There are really really detailed architectural and other design guidelines throughout the project to ensure that it retains a very high quality standard and something that we'd be very proud of. This is just showing you we have site plan or plat approval on a very large percentage of the project already. So there will be areas that we need to fill in with these additional entitlements, but they're in a relatively small area where mixed uses can go. Um just to give you a sense of the quality here, we've talked about uh this project contributes roughly 60% of the cost of lanes three and four for State Road 56 through search charges on the development. We have uh we're also going to generate uh beyond what's in the called the impound account for the four laning of Morris Bridge Road from Chansy to 56. We're going to generate about $40 million additional dollars in mobility fees that the county can use wherever it wants. Uh it's a quality project. Uh Eisenhower is spending about $20 million on landscaping south of 56 alone. $18 million in hardscape improvements and uh 26 million in amenities. heavily amenitized, very high-end project on the south side of 56. Um, you've already seen a lot of this stuff discussed from staff. We already worked out the school site with the school board. Uh, it's under construction or soon to be under construction as I understand it. We worked out the the park site with the county and commissioner. The reason why it was a little bit less than the original acreage is because there's some coll-located facilities between the school board and uh the county on the parks. So parks decided they didn't need that much acreage because of the shared facilities. And this is I believe the largest colllocated facility with the possible exception of wire grass for a big park and a school amenity uh in the county. It's very large. Um, as you'll see, uh, or you heard staff discuss, the net density, even when these new units are added, we're under three units per acre. And that's because we're conserving a lot of the site and we're trying to put the density in tight areas where mixed use areas can work. Um also just point out even with the project uh if these uh additional multif family units meaning the town houses and the apartments are built uh the total amount of the apartments of the housing units in the project is under 18%. And if you compare that to Hillsbor which is at 39% or Orlando which is way higher than that 28% we're still very low. We're very heavily weighted with single family product on this site. No matter what,

there's only a small amount of apartments. I know it seems like a lot when you say that we have 800 and change already, but that's of roughly 64 units. It's just a very large project. It's 3,400 acres.

6,400 units, not 64 units,

right? 100. I'm sorry to say.

Um, can you go back to that map? Am I asking him a question?

Sorry.

Um, and maybe you're going to answer it. Um, okay. That's a no. No. Uh, up there where it says commercial on State Road 56.

Mhm.

And then you have apartments [clears throat] behind there. Is that just like uh strip commercial coming in there that we're trying to get away from?

Are you sure?

Are you putting flop and drops in there?

Talking about up here.

Right there.

Yeah. No, that's where we are.

Now move to the right. Move to the right.

We're going to have one big commercial area up there, but the conditions on the apartments require that they be built. And if I can flip to two more slides, all of this wording in the top 78 of this [clears throat] uh slide are the conditions that we must follow just on the additional apartments. They can only be in a mixeduse project. They have to have a specific look. They have to be on the street. The retention ponds have to be behind it. They have to have specific vistas. It goes on and on and on. There's an incredible amount of regulation. And again, the only thing we're trying to do here is if the surf park happens, we want to be able to colllocate a mixeduse area with apartments in them in that area. That's what we're trying to do there. And as staff mentioned, you see the stuff on the very bottom. I know it's hard to read. The town houses can either only be very large town houses. And we were talking with West Bay about building a very, you know, like a 2400 2600 square foot apartment um that would be a minimum of 24 uh ft wide or they can only be alley loaded or they have to open up onto a green space behind the unit. So this is not adding more entrylevel town houses like everyone else has. We discussed the project. This is a picture of the West Bay section that's been constructed. The project has I think like a 180 page design guideline requirement and it covers every part of the project. It covers every segment of the commercial covers every type of residential product. The project's been very successful. Uh after some entrylevel areas were sold on the north side that were adjacent to some legacy uh mobile home areas, we started building south and the area south of 56. The home sales you see there just for the area south of 56. We've already sold 253 houses over 700 grand. The average West Bay house is over a million. Uh the the project continues to win national and regional awards. It's heavily heavily amenitized. This is a project similar to Wiregrass that we're going to be proud not only proud of for years to come, but it's going to be a financial powerhouse because of how high-end a lot of the houses are and how high the quality is of the non-residential. We talked about the trails over there. There'll be over 10 miles of trails. The overwhelming majority of the multi-use paths are 12 ft wide. There's I think one that's 10 foot wide. And then we

Mr. Waitman, those those young boys are being very dangerous on that trail. [laughter]

Their choice.

Goodness.

And then then choice once again

to Commissioner Starky's uh [laughter] earlier point, yes, we are proceeding with the TICO approval. Uh, and that's we're really looking forward to that being a great unpaved uh, path that's primarily under an oak canopy that's several miles long. So, that's going to be really awesome. As I mentioned, heavily heavily amenitized. These are the life main lifestyle features south of 56. There are four different major amenity areas. These are enormous areas. I'll flip through some of them. Very high quality development and building. Uh, I think three of them have major water features like this. Um, one of them has a major workout area, a wine bar, there's botchi ball, big dog parks, very high-end stuff. So,

are you showing the golf course, which is not in our county,

and the golf course is to the south of us in Hillsboro, but

but I've heard it's going to be

it's supposed to be very highend,

spectacular.

Yes, it's supposed to be very highend. Again, I'm going to turn this over to Tony in just a sec, but I did want to say just a couple of things on my end um before I turn it over to him. There are a lot of things we're glossing over in this, but the board should be aware of that we've done with your staff to try to honor the things that the board wants and asks us to do on new projects that wouldn't be applicable. And I'll give you an example. We don't have really any regulation of gas station sea stores in the existing approval. This one has great limitations on the number that can occur, where they go and for the first time ever, we're actually imposing architectural requirements on a gas station.

Nice.

Never been done. And it's only because we're doing a nice project. We have similar limitations on car washes and self storage. Limited numbers. they have to be off the road. Special, you know, architectural design requirements there. The the only issue I think that I'm hearing from the board is this concern about the apartments. And I want to let Tony talk about the water park in just a sec, but I I'm hearing what, you know, my friends on the on the board are saying, and one thing just I I might throw out there to uh make sure the board understands this isn't a get-rich plan, you know, or anything like that on the apartments. It's tied right now to getting the surf park built, but we're okay just to show the board how th this is about a long view for us and working around the surf park only. If we're okay with saying the 240 apartments can only be built if the CO is issued on the surf park or the latter of three years from the date this is approved. So, it can't be built at any time before 3 years from now. We're just trying to create a long-term planning ability here in case the surf park goes the way we think it will. So, with that, I'm going to let Tony jump in here and talk about the surf park and then we can circle back and have a discussion about the apartments. Before

bring Tony up, should I just say one thing?

Yes, sir.

You know, there's an outside chance that we may get some changes with our apartment codes. We're going to go look at it. It's going to be real tough with the local part. the state may do something as well. Whatever codes do come out in that point, whatever it may be, you guys are willing to follow as well.

Absolutely. And I'm committing to the board if there new fire code changes or or other changes to the the building codes, we will follow those. Absolutely. Again, the only reason I'm even asking for this now is Clark L Miller and I started on this project many years ago and just to get to this point for this discussion today has taken us 2 years and we really don't want to have to do this again 2 3 4 years from now. That's the only reason I'm asking the board's indulgence on it.

This the complexities of this from what was done from 2008 to now and it's different from everything else we've seen in the assumption we made. I only saw the loom as of yesterday,

right?

To what was granted from before. So, as far as the confusion goes on what I've heard, what I've seen, etc. So,

yeah, I'm just trying to again, we're only just trying to if Tony does what he he says he's going to do, we just want a chance somewhere down the road to build something cool next to it.

I want to I want to hear from Tony. Come on.

Okay. Thank you.

Tony Miller, 3614 West Morrison Avenue, Tampa, Florida. I have been sworn. Uh want to thank you guys for a chance to share vision here for the surf park. Uh I've had an opportunity I think to meet with all of you at one time or another to share what we're doing here and uh very excited about this. Uh to Clark's point uh I started talking with some of you almost 5 years ago about this. So it has been a very long road to get to this point. Uh [clears throat] excited to be here. So uh really I think I've shared the vision. This is more than just a surf park. I think a lot of people just think about it simply from the surf perspective. Uh but this is a uh a lifestyle and leisure destination for the community here for tourism. Uh it's going to include the surf park. It's going to include a fantastic beach. It will be a hub for dining, entertainment, recreation. And for a lot of people here locally, one of the things I get most excited about is it will be what we call a third place after work, after home. Where do people congregate? where do they socialize, find community? This will be a place that people can do that. So, it really fulfills on this idea of work, live, play, and the play is often the hardest part to to build into the community. Um, so I've kind of shared uh with you that there's more than just a surf. This gives you a little bit more context to that. Uh, we went through a process here recently where county staff really wanted to hone in and define what would be included in the park itself. Uh so we made commitments to retail, food and beverage. We made commitments to hotel obviously uh the surf component of this. So uh a lot of this has already been uh worked into uh the COAs. So um what you see there is is an illustrative example of that. Um I think Commissioner Stark, you were talking about access and how you would get in here. Uh candidly, I focused on the perimeter in and what we would be doing there. Um, I don't know if there's a spotlight here. Uh, here we go. Um,

all right.

Oh my god.

So, not getting the spotlight. Every time I get it, I let go. Sorry. Um, here you go. So, right in here is where you would come in off of Coats. You would come in. Right there is a roundabout and then it leads into all the parking here. Anybody that would be coming into this is going to be coming in from parking and is not going to be uh involved in traffic coming across coast road and things like that. That's a that's a discussion that uh I I'm not really equipped to have. Um but you can see uh this gives you a good gist of what the park looks like. Um we talk about having an authentic authenticity of experience. Uh this is going to be something that really feels like a surf village oasis. Um, I'm going to skip that slide of me, but but um we talk about um what an incredible asset it is. It's also a huge jobs and economic development uh uh uh support. We've got both letters from the um from Bill Cronin uh at the EDC. We also have a support letter uh from the Florida Sports Coast because they're going to see that it's a also creates an amazing amazing destination for all of our tourism. Um, and that's that's the gist of it. I'm here to answer any questions that you might have.

Any questions? I like to say Tony, I'm excited that you're coming to Pasco County. I mean, I heard about you're trying to do a surf park for years and thank you for coming up to actually Sunwest, take a look up there, what was going on there. But, uh, I think what you got here is something that's phenomenal. When I look at the waves, just so you guys know, when you can move water like that, it keeps it cleaner, purer as well. And the fact that you've incorporated a regular beach to go along with it. I think it's pretty cool. [snorts] People can I think are gonna be sitting out there on the water. Don't even surf. I'm just gonna say I feel like I'm really the the real beach.

Um I think it's a dynamic thing.

I'm glad you guys are in the hotels because I think as we talked

you got [cough] a great hotel potential. For years we got people driving south to Hillsboro bad enough they got to drive down to the golf course. But at least we get them stay in hotels right here. I think it'd be great.

Yeah. And and I would add to that that this will create value uplift for a lot of the residential in the nearby neighborhoods. We've seen it in other parks in other parts of the world. So it will add value to the uh overall area.

I'm glad they found you.

Any other questions?

Thank you. [snorts]

It's Clark KBY again. I just I have been sworn I realized Commissioner uh Starky stepped out for a sec. I don't uh I did want to say one other thing. I happen to notice in the conditions we're talking about the conditions that has to be satisfied for the apartments. The language that I saw in the the uploaded version said that we could apply uh for the apartments upon the issuance of a site development placard. It doesn't say the first CO for the water park and so that wasn't our intent. So we're okay with changing that in condition 41H to say that it's upon issuance of a certificate or of occupancy for the water park. That's actually more in the county's favor. um and trying to again tie this to the fact that um it only happens if the surf park happens

and to whatever codes we adopt between now and then for the

right and that we would do it right and again I'm also okay with adding to that same sentence that we couldn't have the new apartments until the latter of the issuance of this certificate of occupancy for the for the surf park itself

or 3 years from the date of this modification being approved That way that you know, again, I'm just trying to show the county we're not trying to run in there and just build another apartment complex. That's not the intent.

It was a [snorts]

Commissioner.

Yeah.

Uh they were going to do 301. They were talking about how far to the north are they doing 301 because it runs into a two-lane road.

It as I understood, Mr. Henry, the DOT project is to go through the intersection at Chanse. I don't know that there's funding north of Chanse, but the it's the intersection at Chanse, as I've understood from several people, including DOT reps over the years, that's causing the major backup that already exists today, and that we need to resolve. Now, we all want the road fourlaneed and and I'll I'll say this, and I'm not I don't I'm not trying to get sideways with your staff, but if if I were on the board, I realize that the 301 project is a DOT road, but there's a lot of money that this project's going to throw off in in mobility fees, and I might talk with DOT about we can't somehow make this a little bit of a county DOT project to entice the district to try to do something to get the fourlaning of all a 301 going and again it's not my money to spend but that would be how I've always looked at it and I've told David and Nick that the same in private conversations I just we we [snorts] have made it a priority and in in our NO um I think as of a year and a half ago thanks to the board's help and board reps on the no it got moved up to I think our number two road project maybe two or three and DOT knows it's a priority but we really need that road built and we needed it built built a long time ago and it probably would have already been had the Hillsboro board uh 7 8 years ago not derailed DOT from their section of it. But now I understand Hillsboro Countyy's on board and DOT is very actively looking at how to come up with the money to build it.

Also uh the fact of it is when you run in from that point from Chanty all the way into Zephr Hills is two lane,

right? So, you know, if you open up that traffic and you put more traffic in there, you're going to crowd that area going into those two lanes.

It will. And Commissioner, you know, the DOT has told other clients of ours that, you know, they wanted to preserve right away on the east side where 56 could go directly east if it went that way. And I think you and I have discussed privately, I think that's a better alternative. The roadway somehow needs to go more straight than jog up uh through Chanse and then go around that that is not really fulfilling the mission of an arterial road.

That was my wishes but that I'm not sure that's going to happen.

Right. Right.

Yeah.

Commissioner, do is there should we wait for Commissioner Starky? What's the flavor of the board?

No, she may it may take her a while. So, uh any other questions for the applicant?

Okay. So, we did public comment already for P47. We'll do public comment now for P-56. Anyone from the audience would like to speak to item P56.

Anyone online?

Yes.

So, we're going to close comment for 56. We're going to go back to P47. Pleasure of the board.

Vote without Starky here.

She could be a while.

She'll be all right.

No, she could be a while. She

Second.

I move.

Okay. Any further discussion? Roll call vote.

Roll call vote. All right. So, District One, Commissioner Oakley. Hi.

District two, Commissioner Waitman. Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

District four, Commissioner Joerger.

Chair District 5, Chairman Mariano.

I motion pass 30. I go to item B56. Have a motion with the known conditions that were Mr. Jav mentioned.

Move approval.

The the motions with the condition changed to

41H in the CO.

Yeah. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All

in favor say I.

I.

Any opposed?

Motion passes 300.

Thank you.

And staff, thank you for working so closely. There was this is a very complex one, but it's an exciting one. So, thank you.

P48.

All right. So P48 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times August 16th, 2026, August 23rd, August 30th, and September 6, 2026.

Item P48 is PD260471. This is an ordinance establishing the wire grass 3 community development district pursuant to chapter 190 Florida statutes. Providing for authority and power of the district, providing for powers and duties of the district, providing for the board of supervisors of the district, providing for the district budget, providing for functions of the district, providing for miscellaneous provisions, providing for an effective date, and this comes with a recommendation to accept public comment and adopt the ordinance by roll call vote. Okay. Any discussion?

None.

Anyone in the audience want to speak to item P48?

No, sir.

Move approval.

Second.

All right. Roll call vote.

All right. And Commissioner Starky, we are on P 48. Uh, District 1, Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two, Commissioner Wman.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

I.

District four, Commissioner Joerger. District 5 Chairman Mariano.

Hi. Item P49.

I'm sorry. P49 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times, August 12th, 2026.

Item P49 is PD260742. This is an ordinance amending the Paso County ordinance number 25-21 correcting the legal description of Mckendry Point Community Development District pursuant to chapter 190 Florida statutes providing for miscellaneous provisions providing for an effective date. This comes with a recommendation to adopt the ordinance by roll call vote and a presentation if necessary.

A presentation. Okay. Is there anyone here in the audience to speak item P49? Anyone online? No sir. Roll call.

District one. Commissioner Oakley. I'm

waiting to get a motion. Yeah, that's helpful.

We didn't have a motion, did we? [laughter]

I [clears throat] move second.

I move he second.

All right. Now, district.

I.

District two, Commissioner Waitman. Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky. I

District four, Commissioner Joerger. District five, Chairman Mariano.

Hi.

Item P51. Actually, proceedings

51

50.

Sorry, 50.

I like 50.

All right,

I lost the page. [laughter]

P50 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times August 19th and August 26, 2026.

Item P50 is PDE260859. This is an ordinance amending Paso County Ordinance number 25-30 expanding the boundaries of Acacia Fields Community Development District pursuant to chapter 190 Florida statutes providing for miscellaneous provisions providing for an effective date. This comes with a recommendation to accept public comment and adopt through an roll call vote. Any further discussion? Anyone in the audience to speak at this item?

Anyone online?

No.

We have a motion. Move

second.

Uh this is Yes, this is roll call also.

Hi.

So, district one, Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Waitman. District three, Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner Joerger. District 5, Chairman Mariano.

Hi.

Okay. Now, proceed with the public hearings. We already did the swearing in.

We already did swearing in. So, um,

you already swore everybody in, didn't you?

Yes, we did that.

We already did the swearing in. Yeah, they did.

Um, so P-51 was advertised in Tampa Bay Times July 22nd, 2026 and by affidavit certified mailings and site postings.

Item P-51 is PD26 CU15. This is conditional use request the name of private residential helicopter landing area which is a conditional use for a private residential helicopter pad in an AC agricultural district. This is coming with a recommendation to continue the item to the October 6, 2026 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. or soon thereafter as he may be heard in Dade City.

I have a motion to continue.

Move.

Second. All in favor say I.

I.

Thank you. Item P-52.

P-52 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times June 24th, 2026 and by affidavit of service certified mailings and site postings. Item P-52 is PD267866. This is a zoning amendment in the name of Chanzep LLC. It's Chanzep MPUD master plan development which is a resoning request from an AR agricultural residential district to an MPUD. Uh this comes to you with recommendation to continue the item to the October 6, 2026 uh board of county commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. where there may be heard in Date City.

Okay. Have a motion to continue.

Move.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

I.e.3.

P53 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times March 25th, 2026 [clears throat] and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

Item P53 is PD267877. This is a zoning amendment for a substantial modification to the Palmetto Ridge MPUD by Palmetto Ridge Cattle Company LLC EPG. Palmetto Ridge Holding LLC, which is a substantial modification to the Palmetto Ridge MPU. This comes with a recommendation to continue the item to the October 6, 2026 port of county commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter say may be heard in Jade City.

Okay, that motion continues being 53.

Move.

Move continues.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I. 57. 56. No, 56 is done.

We did 54. We did 55. 56.

57.

55.

57.

P57.

P57 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times, July 22nd, 2026, and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Item P-57 is a zoning amendment the name of Emos Commons at 11637 Emma Cemetery Road. It's a change in zoning from an AR agricultural residential district to a C2 general commercial district in East Pasco County north of County Road 52 approximately 280 ft northwest of the intersection of McCabe Road and State Road 52 containing approximately 1.52 acres. This comes with a recommendation to adopt the zoning amendment and there is a presentation if so desired.

Anyone here for a presentation?

No, I've watched this at the time.

Let me just check. Is anyone here to speak to this item?

I I just do have one question.

Okay.

Um Mr. Stury,

can you put the map up? Do you have the map? Um, I think that's the road the trail's coming down. Is that right, Commissioner Oakley?

What's this now?

That's County Pacific.

So, I just want to be sure that the rideway has been preserved for the 12oot orange belt trail.

I don't know what side it's coming on.

Where's this? Is this at County Road 52?

Yes, sir.

Where it starts there? I think I saw signs out on that property the other day. I drove by there.

So, does Steph know?

Yes.

Was planning to go there?

I He's looking. He's looking.

Yeah, I have to look it up. It's been a while since we looked [laughter] at it. Patience.

Generally speaking, with every zoning case, there is a set aside for the rightway if it's not.

But that that's a big one.

It's identified. It's identified in the findings. In fact, the actual rightway is set aside later on when the project comes through at the uh planning stage.

Terry, you better be right because there's nothing to protect you if you don't have it in there. Uh it does say

district five

six

four three district three

it does say condition six there are two months passed one in the north the other one in the south

well it just needs to be not an 8 foot not a 10 foot it's a 12

so right so the they're going to have to provide right away at the time of this of the uh site but it's it's

actually that that condition there was just actually on the cemetery road

that's that that's this you must I'm not talking about county road 52 I'm talking about well actually on both.

Yeah.

I unless it's coming down the other side and I don't know if staff's determined

and you know Aaron who's in charge of this is

is not able to be here today for a health reason. So

yes. So onas road the what they're going to have to upgrade on cemetery road is going to be uh milling and resurfacing uh to include cross slope correction and then lane widening of 12 ft from the center line of cemetery road pursuant to table 91.4b 4B of the land.

That doesn't answer that. That's the road. I'm talking about the orange belt trail.

Now, now you guys are supposed to check this stuff against the trail route, right?

No.

Someone is

chair. has a left turn lane for miles.

If there's if there's going to be road work on Emma Cemetery, the bulk of the traffic comes from Seab Barn and the dump trucks and heavy equipment that come up and down from Seab Barn that you can start to see in that picture.

What's Seab Barn? I don't know what that

that's county's facilities maintenance.

Oh, the maintenance.

Yeah. So, if you're going to require that out of this site for commercial, then Pasco County government has some ownership because they're the ones that wear that road out the most.

However it works out, it's just got to be contemplated.

So the there there is a finding effect. It's number 15 where Cemetery Roa is going to have a substandard road analysis uh on it where at they will identify the correct amount of rideway necessary to fix the the rightway width, not just the road itself.

Okay. Well, I'm just going to add a condition that if the orange belt is determined to be going on this side, they have to plan for it. I'm not saying they have to donate it.

Well, you can't you can't condition including reszoning.

Well, then someone better figure out something out here.

Let me shift from the applicant.

Yeah, Steph, you take a look at a little bit. Let's bring the applicant up. Would you like to hear my entire presentation or just answer the question about the trail?

I think you answer the question. You're going to be

just the trip.

So, at this name and address and when you've been sworn first.

Thank you. Margaret Prize, uh 3810 Northell Boulevard, Tampa, Florida 33624. Um staff has not made us aware of a recommended trail alignment among al along Emmas, but if it's the board's pleasure, we could include it in the deed restriction that we already have a condition to accommodate any rightaway needed for the trail.

I'm good with that. It is the 12oot trail, so it's the mass the the Mac Daddy trail, but I'm fine with that.

I'm assuming you're putting alf there. Uh, no, not for this project. It's a C2 zoning with a deed restriction for 8,000 square feet of retail. If the retail use were to change at time of construction plan, then a new timing and phasing would have to be done.

We have we have live local on this,

correct?

Yeah, there's a live local deed restrictions. So, she's talking about adding the requirement to donate the right.

That was just a trust but verified question.

Um, will your access be off of how do you say that word? Emus. Emos.

Emus. Or 52.

Amaz.

Yeah, that's going to be an interesting stretch with a lot of driveways, but not ideal.

Did you said it was the onus to in the road? That's a good thing. No, I'm just saying if there's a lot of cuts on a trail, you know, it's a lot of cars, but

um cuts when I mean road access off of Emmas. Um

it's a dangerous hobby. Commissioner Starky, it's a [laughter] dangerous hobby.

And I don't know which side they're going to put it on. Uh

the road's already there.

I don't know if that's staff's gone that far. the consultant's gone, but I'm I am okay with moving forward with that language.

So, let's let's state the language for the record, Mr. Goldstein.

So, the applicant has agreed to add an additional condition to their deed restriction that they would donate any additional rightaway needed for the orange belt trail along County Road 52. Is that accurate?

Correct.

Okay. I'll move approval with that.

Well, you have to take public comment, right?

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone have any public to speak to this item?

Anyone online?

Mr. Chairman, just to clarify on the live local, um, as the county attorney has noted, it's finding effect number two, it illustrates the deed restriction that's imposed on the on the project.

All right. Back to the board.

I move approval.

Second

with the condition.

With the condition.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Any opposed? [snorts]

Okay. Item P58.

P58 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times, July 22nd, 2026, and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Good afternoon, William Vermillion, Planning Development, Economic Growth. This is my last time up here today, so you guys can hear me shut up. Sorry about that. So, this is the US41 town homes item PTE 267933. This is the uh the current subject site of a of a former portion of the Ciente MPUD, which is expired. Um, this is for the maximum development of 171 platted town homes and approximately 23 acres. This is on the the north side of uh US 41 on Land of Lakes Boulevard in the Central Market area, 450 ft southeast of the intersection of Wisteria Loop and Land of Lakes. This is the location map in the central market area. The subject sites aerial over to the east. You can see the existing uh Ciente uh resort there and then [snorts] the uh the access there onto Landanda Lakes onto US 41. The current zoning reflecting the old MPUD uh zoning classification from the Caliente MPUD. The future land use of res 9 and res 3. The context map. Uh currently there exists on the north side of US 41 uh a 12- foot multi-use path which connects down to the intersection of uh what will be the tower road extension to Caliente which uh there's been a lot of talk about the Orange Belt Trail today. This pedestrian facility does connect to the Orange Belt Trail. We did look at take a good look at that as it moves on

it's close to it. The orange belt's going up Kiente.

Right. So, what I was pointing out here is there's a existing uh multi-use path here that this project connects to that'll take you down to the orange belt trail. Okay.

When Tower Road punches through and the orange belt trail comes up.

Yeah.

Caliiente up to air and cut off.

This is the MPD master plan. It doesn't say a lot, but the more illustrative binding concept plan, what you'll see here is the majority of these town homes are rear loaded. Um they're what you can see on the interior there with the access. um a majority rear-loaded town homes. It's a it's a pretty straightforward project. Some of the front loaded in the corners where you can't rear load it or get alley access in there. There's one variation request from 9016D11. It's for the interconnects. If we were to go back to the existing master plan, the the applicant requests a variation from a connection to the north and um to the east. To the east is an existing 8-foot uh masonary wall for the uh Caliente Resorts privacy of course and then to the north is an extensive category one wetland. This comes to the board with a recommendation of approval with conditions from the planning commission and from planning development economic growth. I'm available for any questions.

Chair Commission W.

Yeah. the just want to make sure that the buffering the wall sufficient and that way folks who live in Caliente they can keep doing their thing but then the folks who buy into this development don't start complaining about folks in Caliente even though Caliente's been there first by the decades right we hear a lot of this that the buffering is correct that way both sides of the fence will be all right.

Certainly, uh, both sides of the the fence will be all right. I think the the 8oot masonary wall that exists there u,

the the Caliente folks are there first. I'm looking out for them

metaphorically [laughter]

if they want to live that way.

No, the new f the new folks start complaining that they buy in there and then they they're in a two-story townhouse and they're looking out their back window and then they start complaining about Caliente. That's

how that goes. So, I just want to make sure that, you know, uh looking out for the Caliente folks.

We can certainly add some [snorts] uh disclosure language uh to the conditions much like you would a a hall route or an airport. We can add it for for this case as well so people know what they're buying into.

Yeah. Yeah.

Good point.

Anything else for staff?

That's it.

The applicant.

Good afternoon. I've enjoyed my afternoon here with you all. Barbara Will height 8627 Graham Boulevard, Newport Richie, 34652 for the applicant.

We met with you all when we before we when we started on this journey, before we even applied, we met with you all and took your ideas and your suggestions and came up with a really good project. Um, we've got a binding concept plan that has rear loads and front loads. It's been requested that we have uh developers that do that. We have amenity clubhouse and pool. We've spent a special special attention to how our park laid out and as well as the trail around the park around the stormwater pond that's south of the park. So all the detail has been put in place here. It's been thoughtful. Um and we look for your support hopefully. Thank you.

And Barb, are you okay with the condition to put a uh disclosure in?

Yes. Yes. I was whispering over William's shoulder and we were both saying, you know, disclosure condition. So that's fine. And David, your county attorney and I can work out the final language,

right? Go with that, Mr. County Attorney.

Yes, if you can just add that to the motion.

Okay.

Yeah, I'll I'll make a motion and add that in there.

There there is no one.

Anyone here from the public like to speak to this item? Is there no one left?

Now it's the board.

I'll move approval with the condition change.

Second. All

in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? Okay. We'll go to R42 PCC meeting and public hearing time.

Uh chair, would y'all be comfortable if we had a full board for this one?

I'm okay with it.

Yeah, I'd like to continue this till we have a full board to have some good dialogue on it.

Okay, we'll bring it back for 922. Uh should we continue our 432 through then comfortable with that? If I know one was Commissioner Joerger's item, Commissioner Starky did.

Yeah, just wait a rule to tag on. So we'll wait for a full board. Okay.

All right. It'll be to the board for commissioner items. Commissioner open.

I just wiped all that out.

Yeah, we need full board over here on my side. Sorry,

they're not all here.

No, my chair is over. My chair is over. Get out of here. Well, what day was it? I got to remember upside there. On September the 3rd, I uh attended the uh fire academy graduation. Uh some new members to our fire department all join us in the EMS. Very uh very well attended. It was I've been to several of these, but this one here seemed to have a lot of people involved in this graduation from the firefighters. So, I was there. Appreciate it. So, that's all I have. Okay, Commissioner W.

Don't have anything, Chair. Okay, Mr. Ster.

I do, but I'm I'm looking for it. Um, I think I have some photos. Um, all right. I attended the Tampa Bay Wave EDA grant celebration down in Tampa. Um, we, if you recall, we gave them a couple hundred,000 to participate in this grant. And, um, they did win it. Um, what this does is it sets up a defense um, incubator for the Tampa Bay area. Um and uh companies will be competing for investors um to uh help them grow their their businesses. And so I think uh David Engel and and our EDC staff will be attending these meetings because we want to be sure that if someone wants to bring a defense contracting business to Tampa Bay area, they know we would love to be able to have them come to Pasco County. Um so okay. Uh then um I had uh lunch with Laura Lee. I got to sit right next to Bobby and Laurel. It's kind of crazy. Um and um you know, she's picked up a lot of uh Pasco County in her congressional district. So that was a nice lunch. Then um I held my Trinity Odessa Leadership Council meeting last week. I want to thank um our I can't remember his name. Our new guy from animal services was there. David Angel was there. and um Amy was there. Um besides Chase and the uh code enforcement, we had I don't know maybe 20 neighborhoods represented and um David gave a presentation on the penny for Pasco which was excellent. I really suggest you guys do these. It's so that's so good for the neighborhoods to learn what's going on in their areas. Um uh but Amy, she's not here. There she is. Amy knocked it out of the park with her discussion on the county's budget and and how we spend our general funds and our silos and our residents asked a lot of good questions and quite a few of them said why aren't we having town halls so I don't know where Seth went but um so I wanted to bring that up here because [gasps] There was a lot of discussion there that people should learn more about what Amy spoke about and that other communities are scheduling town halls, not ju just to give information because, you know, we can't advocate for one side or another, but if you're following what's being said online, there's a lot of misinformation. people people just have no idea what percentage of our budget's going to be affected and how that's going to be affected. So, um I wanted to throw it out to you. Uh if anyone else I want thinks we should have a town hall. Um and we when Mike and I were talking if we did do that, it should be maybe three east, central, west. Now, I'll I'll be doing this again uh in like two weeks with my har my harbor south. So, my my my holiday and um coastal areas. Amy will be presenting again and you'll have a little more time. But, um didn't you feel Amy that people thought that you should be doing this? Yeah. So

thoughts to the board on that one.

Town halls are good. I' I've had different uh go out and have meetings in different parks and things. They of course they invited me to come and talk to them and they're pretty appreciative of us coming out talk to them like that.

Yeah. We just give them information.

Yeah.

And I think I think a lot of people are looking for a better place for information than someone doing a posting on Next Door. Um so I would suggest that we do it that Amy do it. Not not a commissioner.

The budget director.

She's willing. I already talked to you about it. Right Amy? Yes.

Yeah. This is the the the proposal is is you know currently we came before the board last meeting. We talked about the website. There was information that was out there. Commissioner Starky through her community involvement had a town hall I guess within her district. Of course staff are always available to assist with whatever topics. One of the topics was to discuss the facts behind amendment three. Those that was discussed and it was great. And so the proposal that the commissioner is really bringing forward is is do you want additional town halls that are we would put county staff out there, invite the public to and educate on amendment three. It would just it's another another level of of education. So I would just need direction if you want to support that.

I am in support.

I'm not

of not advocating but educating. You don't need to go. People who [clears throat] are interested and want to learn about our budget will go. People make up their mind.

If it's about our budget. Yeah.

That's what it is. Just on our budget. She's got a

I would envision the materials would closely resemble what is currently on the on the website right now.

Just how we do our budget and where the money goes.

Our budget and where the money goes. Correct.

I I think it's important to let people know about our budget. I mean especially you know 0809 we went through some major things about cuts we had to make etc but I think the the majority of people here we have a $2.2 billion budget they don't know the adm is only a fraction of that and they don't know that even with that fraction it's going to be allocated to 75% already to be spent which in one year's term the first changes we're coming short almost almost $4 million short u so I I think the education of people is a fine thing to do so they understand that and I would make it open for anybody want to stream in to go look at it so anybody else from our own could look at it as well. Mr.

Yeah, I think it'd be a good idea to talk about our budget and talk about um the the different things that we have that we offer people like the services we give the public. You can ask most of them they'll say I don't get any service at all. But the fact of it is there's a lot of services they they receive but they don't understand or know. But doing this we would uh open that door up. It'd be a good thing to know.

I'm just looking for

All right. Um the two other things I am just going to uh actually have three but I'm going to wait till Commissioner Joerger's here on the child care one. And um I just wanted to say uh this is kind of tough, but while I was sitting here I I did get um earlier in the meeting I got word that my father-in-law was not doing well. Well, he has been doing well for a while, but that his health was definitely going down today. But during the three rivers, two rivers, I I did get word that he passed away. So

I'm very sorry to hear that. Yeah, he had a wonderful life and um but he his last few years have not been wonderful and so we're grateful that he's in heaven with Marsh now.

Yes, great great great man, great family. [clears throat]

That's all for me.

Okay. Um so to go back to Commissioner Starky just a little bit too. Um, we keep hearing about how the the growth, these changes, etc. Um, wastewater plants, Mike, you could probably speak to it better about the capital improvement budget history. Um, the increases we've had have been dramatic, and I'll let you get to that a little bit, but

Oh, that's cheap.

Just to touch on a couple of other things that per lane mile from 2008 to 2026, it's been about a 35% increase. The sidewalks about a 257% increase. Wastewater treatment plant. These will show they're from 146 to 682 795%. Mike,

we're looking at this chair.

Yes.

From that chart there, that's the waste one. I give another one as far as the other ones. Fire station, the increase per square foot has gone up 388%. Think about that number. District Park fields from 2006 to 2024 up over 88%. And a multi-use path. This might be because of Commissioner Starky's increased demand that she's putting on the system.

Yep. [laughter]

Let less wear and tear on the roads.

567%. So all those things when we hear about you know things have gone up cost of living's like 7 8% 9%. Our costs for these major purchases just just some of them people just need to understand that and that may part of the education process too that you talk about. Mike did you want to talk about the wastewater treatment plant?

I mean I you know I mean costs costs of everything have increased and and water wastewater plants uh clearly have increased. I know when I first started here we would budget something on the order of $3 per gallon of treatment. I can tell you those numbers are probably um you know quintupled if not more than where they where they stand today. The cost of treatment has increased because obviously the standards have increased. You can no longer surface water discharge any any waste water anymore. It's all 100% reclaimed in this county which I think is is a great thing. We're ahead of the game because Senate Bill 64 many many years ago uh kind of kind of offshot that. So um those those are very expensive measures. I mean they are they are funded by our rateayers but they are necessary too to to to make sure that the infrastructure keeps up with with what is demanded of it

and you know just for the last increase of from 2021 to now was over 146%.

Mhm.

Before that the increases were much more dramatic.

So yeah even through this year when they when they talk about our spending I think when you look at what we've actually done our voters wanted to go get more fire stations. They wanted better roads, etc. They wanted the sheriff, all the general expansion, etc. I mean, it's all things that we had to go do and put bonds up for them to go build them. So, it's what our people asked for and we just want to just find a way to keep on going and give them the service they ask and whatever requirements on that, we'll we'll deal with it. But it's just important to know everything we have in front of us.

Okay. Uh, county administrator.

No, I just want clarity here. So, the the majority of the board here then is comfortable with doing three workshops uh to primarily discuss kind of dissecting the county budget, if you will, and tangentially uh facts on amendment three is

okay. I mean, I'm I'm kind of

just saying the majority of the board, I understand.

Um we'll keep it focused on that. Obviously, that may or may not coincide with the actual budget hearings, but that's not really This is more just an education.

No, this is just education for the voters. for the voters. Okay.

Come November or so. Yeah.

All right. I understand. Thank you.

Anything from the post office?

Yes, sir.

County attorney.

Um, I just need you to point me to the Pasco County Consolidated Justice Information Board. Currently, the Mr. Stein Snider is the appointment. So, if you could just appoint me to that board, please.

Do you want to be on that board? County attorney.

Um, I've been told I have to be.

You didn't answer yes or no like an attorney. [laughter] Yeah,

I'll make a motion to appoint

the sieges board.

Oh, sieges. Yes.

Sie appoint siege whatever. Yes.

Attorney Goldstein to the sie just sieges board.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed? Unanimously set up.

Thank you.

You looking got more.

Can't wait.

Okay. Um I don't have anything further, but I I do think that um I talked to the county attorney. It was a question asked about a citizen about as far as the use of drones. Um, are they

take a break legal? Do they violate Florida statute? And if you want to talk about that a little bit, David,

I think that there is a statute that covers drones and there are they certainly can be used legally. I mean, there there are restrictions on the use of drones. there. Even for a law enforcement agency, there are limits on to which a law enforcement agency can use drones. You cannot they cannot use them um to survey private property without a warrant, but they can get a warrant even to survey private property. Um there's exceptions. They can use them for traffic enforcement. Um there's certain emergency situations they can use them. They can use them to search for missing persons. Sometimes if there's an escape, somebody escapes from prison, they can use them for that purpose. So there are exceptions where they can be used, but there are also limits to which they can be used. But the question I was asked is, is it legal for a law enforcement agency to use a drone? The answer is yes, with limitations.

They have limitations.

No different than an airplane falling interstate pulling people over.

But it's the same thing for the county. The county the county we have county departments to use drones and we have limits to which we can use those drones as well. I mean so we can use them for certain emergency purposes and for traffic purposes and we can't use them to survey somebody's private property either.

Property appraiser does

yes pick up an eighth of an inch

but that's one of the exceptions is the property appraiser is allowed to use them for

I hate allowed for property I wish could use it. So the property appraiser is allowed to use them for for appraisal purposes, but that all of the exceptions are in the statute. So the question was that came to me is are they illegal? And yes, as long as you follow the limitations of the statute, but you can't exceed the limitations of the statute because that would be considered a violations of of privacy.

Well, every realtor uses drones and they'll pick up every house in the neighborhood when they fly that thing up there. Farmers use drones now

and share them. People go to our county parks to film their good time or film boats up on the water using their own personal drones. So, the public's going to have more freedom to go look around on other people than law enforcement.

Well, keep in mind

that's what I'm trying to

and Walmart is going to be delivering by drone. Well, to be clear, the statute's regulating primarily the government's use of of surveilling property. So, um it's not really addressing private use, although we're we're we're basically preempted. I mean, that's that's something that the state and federal government regulate. We don't typically regulate that issue. So one of the things that you know whether it be flock [clears throat] axon or the new one sky sky do um is the hacking part where the information goes once it's out done from a remote command software and if it can be hacked into it may not be intentionally done that way but if that information is out there and people are hacking into it it's a concern of mine. So, I think as we look at these items down the road, especially if we're funding them or or whatever the case may be, that we do do our due diligence and maybe Todd Bailey needs to look into this one here a little bit. He looked at the other ones flock found out there were ways for vulnerabilities. I think this one here should get looked at as well.

We can certainly do that. I know Chase is here if the board wants to hear the sheriff office perspective, but uh certainly we can look into the data the data side of the equation. Okay. All right. Anything else? the board.

All right. So, we adjourn at till 5:30

5:15

5:00 5:15.

Oh, no. 515.

5:15.

5:00.

You want to Sorry, I thought you said

5:15.