3.24.26 Pasco County Board of County Commissioner Meeting (Afternoon Session)

thought about it, right? But they the standard dedication for utilities. So then we put the standard dedication for utilities. We got the conveyance to the county for the last round,

but this is all private and I We don't have any utilities at all. Are you okay? It's a 12. It's a 12T wide.

Yeah. Right. We're after season. I don't have time for this. Yeah,

so

I sent it to Morgan and it wasn't it wasn't just that utility comment. So utility comment is fine. I'm fine with that's what they want to do.

There were well there were some other Right.

Okay. So, if they fixed everything, then we'll release it. If it if it but I took a quick look at it, it didn't look like the pipes were going to the city. It looked like pipes were coming to us. So, that we may that may well in the one that we just got this morning, it's still not right. So, I'll when we get done when we get done with the board meeting, I'll

try and get into the weeds. Well,

you know, use it use it using review using that review function of word is almost a nobrainer. But but the problem I've got with notes on the on the myar is sometimes they get moved and then it's Yeah. But yeah, she she prefers to do everything electronically. I I I normally strike through it and then scan that page and send it back. doing the best I can. I don't think you got enough. I give you slack on this one.

I like push my weight. Let's go. Wait a minute.

Got pink ties on forg purpose.

Easter. That's another week off.

Good. That's when you should be wearing it. tie soccer.

I was just like what I want. time.

Um, let's give her a minute just because we ran late.

Send her a picture of me. picture.

Yeah.

There she is. There she is. We're going to call back to order the meeting at 1:30. Um, we had a few people from the item that we were going on for rangeand and there were there were a few people online. Are there still people online?

There are still people online. Not sure exactly which ones, but I'll I can read them off a list if we have them. Patrick Briggs. Gabriel Bousard. Gabriel Bashard. Steven Gladen. We see you online. We're not hearing you, sir.

I just got a notification from staff that they cannot hear online from anyone speaking. So, Khalil, can you make sure everything's open? Steven Gladen we can see again we can see him online but um Karen Stats we'll come back to Mr. Glenn Karen S ti Allan Atlas Richard Rogers which is there. Is he muted? Unmuted?

Yeah, they're not.

All right, folks. As we as we call you, if you're online, you have please make sure to unmute yourself. I got a text from

Raymond Jolene.

He's muted.

Those of you who have been trying to, we're seeing you, but we're not. It's showing that you're muted.

It says they're muted and he can't unmute himself. Ray Joe line just respond.

Are they still locked?

Yeah.

While they while they look at that, I know there's one person who was in the audience that he didn't get a chance to speak. So, why don't I bring him up, sir? Name address for the record.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Uh, my name is Caam Shokut. I'm a resident of Beexley. My address is 16778 Courtyard Loop. I'm here today because I'm deeply concerned that the community I love is being traded for highspeed transit corridor without our consent or even clear explanation. We often hear that adding lanes is a solution to congestion, but data tells a different story. Adding lanes does not improve traffic efficiency. It's a short-term fix that leads to induced demand. More lanes simply invite more cars until we are right back where we started, only with more noise and more danger. Instead of connecting us, these multi-lane roadways act as concrete scars that divide our communities. When we widen roads, you aren't building bridge, you are building a barrier. It becomes a psychological and physical wall that severes one side of neighborhood from the other. This loss of cohesion is the first step towards community blight, turning vibrant, walkable sanctuary into a transit corridor that people just want to speed through, not live in. Think about the human cost of those extra lanes. For a senior citizen or a child, every additional lane of traffic is gone left. It takes significantly longer for pedestrians to cross a four-lane road than a two-lane road. Every second they are stuck in that no man's land is a second where they're vulnerable to a high-speed fatality. We urge the commission to move away from the carcentic sprawl and dangerous strokes. those multi-lane roadways that are neither efficient highways nor safe streets. These design encourage high-speed lane changes and make pedestrian accidents inevitable. Pasco should instead focus on walkable multi-use destinations where people aren't forced to drive a car for every small errand. Commissioners, we ask you to build for the residents, not for the commuters. Please support option A, keep roundabouts intact, and reject any plans for a high-speed interchange that would divide and endanger our community. Thank you,

Mr. Chair. We think we've come up with a workaround, so we're going to try to start with the top of the list. Uh, one more time, I believe Patrick Briggs was not online, uh, nor was Gabriel Bashard, but we did have Stephen Gladen.

Yes. Mr. Glen, can you unmute yourself or try unmuting now?

Stephen still so shows you're muted and that's not from our end. It's from his end. Stephen, try again.

Mr. Glen, can you try again, please?

Bring him forward. Someone else.

Uh, let's try.

One, two. Can you guys hear me?

There we go. There we go.

All right. See, kind of jumped in there, but I apologize.

You're this Raymond Jolene?

Yep. Raymond Joe line.

Okay.

And we can see you.

Oh, awesome. Even better.

So, I'm your address, Raymond?

I'm Rachel Line. I'm with 16658 Verto Lane in beautiful Lando Lakes here. uh Beexley resident and uh thanks for the opportunity to speak.

Go ahead.

Uh I want to start pointing out something that has been clearly addressed. Why is Beexley the only community being asked to accept a potential six lane in uh the inner interchange? Uh Starky's not facing that. Other surrounding communities aren't, but but we are. We're in a unique position at the location for this ultimate buildout. our community understands and you know we need this improved connectivity but why why is it us and uh what we do not support is the future introduction of an inter interchange and a six lane through our residential community. Um that is where the concerns lie from a traffic standpoint. County representatives have already confirmed that's an interchange connection is to be made in the future. the proposed roundabout that's already there will not be able to handle that that volume. So, uh to that point, a signal intersection similar to what is being proposed in the original option B would most likely be required and we do not want that. Uh this leads to serious questions about fiscal responsibility. How responsible is to spend tax dollar taxpayers money constructing a roundabout that you're ultimately going to have to remove and replace? And then why is it coming towards us? you can go towards Starky as well and put that six lane highway. You know, uh it just doesn't seem to be to be fair or fiscally responsible. Um

these concerns are even more important given the statement made during the meeting. Commissioner Starky, you stated that you wanted the interchange today and clearly advocating for the ultimate preferred option that includes the six lanes and its interchange. Bring it up towards your residents. I'm sure they'll be here talking, you know, like this this is not right. or you're going to put it towards us instead. Um, why are we even putting this at all? That's that's my question. And I guess Commissioner Joerger, uh, you know, you're coming up for re-election. You represent our community. We really need your your support here. Okay. Uh, we're trying to be reasonable. We support a road, but let's do it where it it's beneficial for our community.

Uh, we do not support planning for an interchange that was never contemplating uh or fundamentally altered. it will totally fundamentally alter our community. Uh finally, I formally request that the reference of the six lane roads and the interchange be removed from all documents, plans, and materials under this consideration of this board, leaving those references in place directly conflict with the county comprehensive plan which never contemplated an interchange uh at the location as well. That leads to my last point. What legal authority does the board have to amend uh the legislative approved comprehensive plan under this item 31? This item is not being presented or a build as a comprehensive plan amendment and therefore the board has no right or authority to change it through this action. These are serious planning, fiscal and legal issues that deserve proper consideration. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Uh, Richard Rogers. Mr. Rogers, we're changing your status. Try now.

Okay. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Oh, okay. Very good. Uh, well, I'm Richard Rogers. I live at 18068 on Way in Beexley. I agree with all of the other Beexley residents and others that have the same comments. I have a particular question. It's not about Beexley and said, but it does is affected by Britain's land project. I ask that

you can ask, but we don't have a dialogue back and forth. Well, the the question I have because it's not been addressed at all is there's a uh there's a a group of people that uh fly radiocrol airplanes at the West Pasco Modeling Association that is down towards western end of the rangeand uh project. And I'm wondering how how this will affect their uh being able to continue to there's about 200 people in that group that be able to participate there. Uh is this going to make them have to move their uh their flying field or will they still be able to be able to use that?

We don't respond during public comment. So if you want to ask your questions, fine. We may discuss it when the commissioners start talking again. you you're wasting your time. We we don't want back and forth. So, we may discuss it when commissioners it comes back to the commissioners at the end of the public comment.

Okay. Sorry.

Are you done, sir?

Yes.

Thank you. We're going to go back. Steve Gladwell, stand by. Give us just a moment. Mr. still shows he's muted.

Mr. Gladen, try it one more time. We've changed your status here, but it hasn't reflected on your end. Um, Christy Latell, I'm sorry.

Alio Rivera, can you hear me?

Yes, sir. Please proceed.

Okay. No, thank you for the opportunity uh to to talk. I'm Ria. I'm also a neighbor of uh Beexley uh 16659 Vibra Lane. Uh moved here uh moved here around 6 and a half years ago. I'm the original resident of the owner of the house. Honestly, never made aware about this uh this project. Anyway, the community does uh support uh option A. We know we need to we need to support uh uh one of the options but that's the really the uh the option that the community is uh it's uh supporting. I did heard at the beginning of the meeting probably some uh discussions about some of the members I believe it's from the transportation community and I really want to make sure that it's not interpreted that uh the prefer option is the option that uh the community supports. Okay. So if you if you come and do a pulse check at the Beexley uh at the Beexley community definitely that's not the option that it's uh supported you know so just wanted to convey uh what is uh the the the option that is supported a lot of us move here because of the the environment the opportunities the the open space the safety uh of uh of uh what what Beexley brings to us and we feel that this is going to be this is going to be damaged by other by any of the other options. Okay. So just that's really what I just wanted to convey. Uh thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you sir. Joshua human. Does his status need to change? Mr. Human, try it now. still shows muted.

Josh,

no comment. Just no comment. Just listening in. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Um Lee Wiscowski Le still shows you change status. Uh, Mr. Wkowski or Lee, please try it now. Stephen. Um, Bon,

stand by. We're changing.

Hello.

Okay. Yes, sir. Can you hear me?

Proceed.

Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Steven Babin. I live at 3981 Broad Porch Run in Lando Lakes with my wife and family. I also serve in a community leadership role. I'm on both the HOA and CDD board. Um but I'm here representing myself as a voter and you know for my personal interests and my family's interests. Um I am asking you directly to oppose the preferred alternative and if you can't do that to please post postpone the vote today so that the community can have more time to review the facts as this um proposal was kind of a last minute addition to the agenda and we haven't fully vetted it um officially as a community and then equally as individuals. Um I I kind of want to reiterate some facts that were brought up. Um, you know, Beexley was planned as a master plan community that we all purchased into that was approved through the county commission and through these processes. Um, as a walkable human scale community. Um, you know, we chose to live here so we could walk to our schools and our parks neighborhoods and use trails and amenities. Um, having a six lane highway through the middle of that would would violate that design and make it unsafe. Um, it essentially splits half the community directly in half. Um, and that's really not acceptable for pretty much anybody that lives here or anybody that's purchased here. Um, and and there a lot of thought and process went into designing this place. And I think most of us want to see it through. So, um, overwhelmingly the community community has supported option A and I also support option A and I and I think we need to do that. I think if we go down these other paths, we're kind of going down roads where things haven't been presented. There's not enough time. I and and and that's pretty much where I'm at. I think um you know the community has spoken about it and and I just would would hope that you would respect you know our voices. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you,

Lindsay Mazinski.

Good afternoon.

Yes, go ahead. We're getting it.

Hi. Thank you. So, my name is Lindsay Mosinski. I represent Asteria Community Development District, which is located at 14745 Prominade Parkway. Um, I've been asked to read a statement to the commission today regarding this um route study. Uh, we understand that it's going to be constructed and the board and the district wishes to work collaborative collaboratively with the county. Be better if I could talk a little bit more clear for you as well. Um, but we also want to make sure that we address all of the concerns that the Asteria residents have. We've heard the opposition today from a lot of the surrounding community development districts and our neighbors. Uh, and we do support something that makes sense and that is safe and prioritizes the public benefit uh, as well. And so we're also going to be asking for a continuence of this new preferred alternative so that it can be fully vetted so that the public can be involved in an additional workshop or a town hall. Um Asteria is concerned with any type of street connection through its internal streets to rangeland. Uh and that is also something new that is being proposed in this preferred alternative with a right exit lane. That's not anything that has been discussed in the years prior that this has been brought up. Uh there's also major concerns regarding sound barriers and other pedestrian traffic. And so we're really looking forward to working with the county on this, but we also want a public vetting process that allows genuine feedback from the rest of the community to come through and to be taken into consideration before any final decisions are made. Thank you. I'm seeing Mr. Rogers. Richard Rogers. Uh, are you

You heard You did Rogers already, didn't you?

No, it was Joe Line.

I don't have anything further.

Okay.

No, you heard from Rogers.

The only other one was Gladen. Steven Gladen, and he's not on there now.

Uh, what about Lei?

Believe we tried. You tried but I don't think you ever

which one was

we did Lindsay.

Yeah.

Oh, different names. I'm sorry.

Lee Wizowski.

Leaving.

She left.

You left?

Okay. All right. So, that's all for public comment then.

That's all I have.

Okay. All right. It is to the board. Could

I ask a question? Okay, Mr. Ros,

um maybe Panos, you can come forward.

This

tell me about the six lane portion of of the road that that if the connection is to the Sun Coast where where will that start and end on Rangeland Road?

It will start at South Branch Boulevard on the west side of San on the map here. Um,

do we have the conceptual plan?

Is there is there another map?

By the way,

I'm not sure. Just one more.

Okay. Am I seeing there now to the east there is the roundabout they're talking about

to the east and to the west you see the connection of South Branch with the future Rangeland Boulevard just west of Sun Coast which is in the blue lines you can see South Branch where it extends

close to Rangeland Boulevard.

Okay. South from south branch back to the east

to the east end to the west end of the roundabout.

Well, no. No. Where you going?

Leaving the map.

Leave it right there. So,

does it go all the way to the roundabout?

Yes,

it ends at the roundabout. Ends at the roundabout. So, it

ends at the roundabout. So, it'll come back into four lanes before the roundabout.

Thank you.

Yeah. And you need to make clear where the transition back to four lanes is going to be. It's going to be past the roundabout on Bexley Parkway.

Roundabout. We're going to drop the lane as a right turn lane towards Beexley Village.

So, there's no six lanes in Beexley.

Not six lanes in Beexley.

I understand.

That's what I'm trying to get at. I don't I don't think that was very clear.

And and but Beexley Parkway is set up for four lanes. Right now, there's two lanes, but the right of way is preserved for four lanes in the future. Our engineer has a concept if the board would like to see what that looks like.

Yes, please.

Yeah, we can provide you six lanes and I was getting confused.

Where am I at? Is that upside down

potentially?

Yeah, it's upside down.

Okay. So basically the s the third lane going east will become a right turn lane going south on Bad Beexley Parkway. So it's it will not extend to the west to the east of the roundabout on Bad Beexley Parkway.

So I don't know how many feet or how how far that is from the roundabout. It goes into the six lane toward the Sun Coast.

Yes. from the west end of the roundabout towards Sanos, it would be six lanes. Should we build the the interchange?

Should it ever be built?

Yeah. Should should the interchange.

I just want to know how far it went. Cuz if it went through the roundabout, I know that' be very hard to do because that's already built in and

it will not

be hard to change that to six roundabouts.

But that's not showing six lanes.

It is on the left

on the left on the west going toward the sun. You see one set of dots

separated dashes.

That's two lanes.

This is

We're asking to see the six lanes. So this is

where is the six lane on the diagram because it's not there

where your pan is. Is that

So just for clarification, this is the preferred alternative which is just a four lane. But what you see chevron there, the the stripes that are going along, that's providing the extra pavement that would that would allow for a connection to go smoothly into and drop right at Beexley Village. So basically, you're preparing the roundabout to make sure it can accept an additional lane. So that lane would kind of use some of that chevron pavement to drop into. So it would be the lane would end exactly at the Beexley Village roundabout.

Do you have a map that shows the six lane? We can show you the the concepts B and C or concept C shows six lanes with

you want to see.

Okay.

Yeah.

Let us see.

While we're waiting for that panos,

yes,

com was brought up by a civil engineer. Was this road designed as an arterial or a collector?

I believe it's a collector as part of the

when it's when you add six lanes to it, does that change it from an arterial to a collector?

I don't think so. I mean,

can we got a plan to answer question?

We we will confirm that, but uh I'm not uh 100% sure.

What is range land?

I think really the question should be what is what is the purpose of the six lanes? Who requested the six lanes and why are they necessary? The purpose is does it violate the comprehensive plan?

Go ahead. Answer that first. Yes.

Uh the need for the six lanes comes from building the interchange and the reason is because between the distance between the ramps of the interchange and the roundabout is very short. So the cues of the vehicles entering the roundabout will back into the ramps of the interchange and impact the main line of the of Sunost. So Turnpike asked us to if we want the interchange to put six lanes between uh South Branch Boulevard and the roundabout. So the request to answer your question commissioner is from from the turnpike.

You're going to tell me my question is my question is very basic. going from six lanes from two lanes to of going from four lanes to six lanes. Is it turning that segment into a arterial or is this still considered a collector?

I don't have that answer right now. Uh

I'm still waiting for it.

I don't understand what it is.

Commissioner, the definition of arterial and a collector are very similar. It's written in the it's called the Ashtto Green Book. It's a federal standard, but there's long, you know, several paragraph description. It's somewhat subjective to say exactly what the threshold is. I don't believe it's tied to a number of lanes. So, I would have to try to get I'd have to actually read the chapter to tell you if exactly what it would say, but but in general terms, I don't believe it it ties to a number of lanes.

All right. So, let me ask a planner.

Aren't we with commissioner Oakley?

I'd really like the county engineer to speak to that if I could, sir. That's fine. Okay. I basically understand what you're talking about now when it it'll transverse into that six lane, but but it won't affect the roundabout.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Nick Uran, county engineer. Um the question is if you build a six-lane road, is it still a collector? No, we don't we don't build six lane collector roads in Pasco County.

So, it goes from a collector to an arterial with the We don't have any six lane collector votes in Pasco County.

Okay.

So, it's an arterial.

It stays arterial the whole road.

All right. Here comes

those are your choices.

Finish, please.

Yeah. Yeah. It it is in our comp plan. It is a collector road with an ultimate cross-section of four lanes. And we don't have any examples of other roads throughout Pasco County that are called collective roads that have an ultimate cross-section of six lanes.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. That answer my question where it started and

Okay.

Yeah. If if it's put in I just wonder that doesn't affect the roundabout itself, but it relieves that traffic once it comes through the roundabout and moves people will be able to move to the right and other people can go straight ahead. Correct.

And that's what I want to kind of clear. Yeah. That's good.

Yeah. Panels, don't leave.

I ain't gonna let you get away that quick.

So, I have a question. What is the estimated cost of the project if we wait for the interchange? I know that's a hard one, but

yeah, I don't Well, are you commissioner asking if we build alternative A, we built four lanes and we don't account for the additional pave area for the Well, I don't have that number, but I know for a fact that if we build alternative A and then we go to build the additional lanes in the future, we will have to rebuild drainage because the excuse me, the curbs on the outside and the inlets and everything will reset. So those will have to be reconstructed and the utilities will have to be relocated once again because there will be utilities that when we go to widen to the outside then we will have to relocate the utilities too. So it's going to be costly disruptive to traffic because it's easier to add lanes in the median than on the outside. So you know and obviously it will be costly but I don't have the the figure how much it will cost. So if you built the lanes and you did not build the interchange, do you have a guesstimate of how much that would be? Like if you left the room, you left the drainage.

Yes, we have that number.

Build the roads but but have the right

the space reserved.

Yes, we have that number. Is that's the preferred alternative. Right. The

build six lanes or four but you leave the space in between to

That's what alternative,

right? So, the preferred alternative does not build the interchange. The preferred alternative just provides four lanes with an extra wide median with 44 feet. And the extra width in the median doesn't cost a lot. I mean, and it's fit within the rideway corridor. Um, it's basically it's it's just kind of bumping out on the outside, pushing those lanes out now so you can widen to the median later. uh the the major cost differences between alternative A and alternative uh the preferred alternative is driven a lot by some of the other features that we added to enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety. We added another pedestrian underpass which extended the reconstruction required some reconstruction but parkway we also included another roundabout which helps uh push down the speeds because that's another question another concern we had from the public particularly where we have school children walking around. So, we tried to do what we could to impose those speeds through things like additional roundabouts. And then we tried to make sure we provided dual paths on both sides to make sure that the kids could get off of the the road. They didn't have to use a bicycle lane no matter what side they were coming from. So, that's really the b the major part of the difference. We also increased the the cost we assigned to the right ofway. Uh it's the same amount of rightaway impact between alternatives B and C and the preferred alternative, but we we we had a more refined estimate which we we made sure we only updated the preferred alternative because the other ones were shown to the public just using publicly available kind of rightway appraiser uh cost per per acre. But when you do a more refined cost that also increased the price, it was about 20% of the of the overall $40 million increase. So that's not being driven by the extra wide median. the the width and the median was basically just you know the the price of of the you know additional land or the additional space in between it but it's not really driven a lot in the construction cost

also also the fact about the cost of the longer it takes to do some of these things the actual cost has been climbing rather than going down

yes and that's why it's hard to predict to to Commissioner Jagger's question it's difficult because without knowing the construction date in the future I mean we could provide a calculation where we would show the cost of reconstruction in present dollars that just wasn't part of the analysis that we were con conducting as as part of the route study.

Mr. Starky,

do you have more questions?

Nope, I'm good. Thank you.

And maybe I might generate some for you.

Okay.

Um, so I wrote down things as people were talking to talk about. Um, someone brought up the roundabout South Branch. Well, I think you what you just said is the reason why we're doing these roundabouts. It makes it safer for pedestrians to get across. This is a major trail for the county coming through here. The orange belt trail. It's starting in Trinity may have already started in Trinity. Well, and uh is going all the way across the county to the with Luchi State Park. Um and we want people to be all those people that live on the south side to be able to safely um get to the trail and uh and traffic, you know, traffic calming. If we don't have those roundabouts and we have that and I'm talking now on the west side, we won't have this I think on the east side, but if we have this road with wilderness on one side and very few cross crossings, we're going to have drag races out there. So, we've got to got to have the traffic surface out there. Um,

gun highway. Um I think um there's potential for more connections from rangeand to 54 and we need to explore those and keep those options um on the table as those properties come in for development west of Atoria. We have Lake Lake Point, but there's another developer who's come in. I haven't seen him in a a year or two, but his property also he's got two big pieces and we contemplate a road there as well. Um, uh, someone made a comment about density. Yes, we when you have an intersection of highways like the Sun Coast of 54, that is where you put density. That's basic planning. Um the interchange gosh we've been talking about. So the place where we do the road talk talking like what we're talking about here today is at our MO which is our metropolitan planning organization. Every county has one. Um some counties are multiple there's multiple counties involved in an NPO. We get federal money for a lot of these roads and our cities sit on that and that is where these discussions happen. not so much here. Um, and we've been talking about this interchange since I was elected 14, 15. I don't know if you were talking about before I got to be a county commissioner. I'm trying to remember when I was on the school board,

you brought up this interchange importance, Jack. Um, so we have talked about it for many, many years. It's just that we don't always get into those discussions here. You can shake your head, but unless you came to the NO meetings, you can you can listen. We can talk about it for a long time.

Um, so the underpass,

go ahead, please.

The underpass on um, Beexsley is a great amenity to safely cross a road. I wish we had more of those in the county. And I'm pushing for more everywhere that we can get them so pedestrians and cyclists can safely get from one side of the road to the other. Um, someone asked why the six lane. I think you described it. It's it's not us. It's it we could just keep the fourlane and I think we could should still fight for that. Um if and when that these connect, this is DOT saying that it has to go to six lanes, not us choosing to go to six lanes. So I think that's I think we need to reserve the land but still, you know, make the make the argument when the time comes and see see what those numbers look like then. But that's a long time away. Um, this road does go through Starky Ranch. It was always planned to go through Starky Ranch. There's two roads that go through Starky Ranch. When we were developing it, we tried to have both roads have equal weight long spur, which turns into Lake Blanch Drive and Rangeand and U County won that argument. And we have rangeand that goes a little it's a little higher density but um it has roundabouts and I can tell you there's thousands of kids in there that go to school on their bikes on their tri on their um scooters. We've had no accidents. It's incredible the amount of kids that are are getting to school not in a car. Um, Atoria. No, Atoria's always been planned to connect to rangeand and it must connect to rangeand. We cannot have subdivisions in our county that only have one way in and out. And we learn and if you were stuck in your house when we had that um oil spill on 54, you couldn't get out of a story yet during that in that day. So, um, everybody needs to have at least especially at least two, uh, waste into their community, especially if you have more than 100 houses. That's just that's just one of our rules, and it's just a very important rule. Um, and I think you're going to like having rangeand behind you if you want to get somewhere and not have to get out on 54 because we continue to develop. There are thousands of homes still permitted but not built yet that are going to be using 54. And so we plan for the future 20 years out, 30 years out, 40 years out, we won't be here. You may not be here, but someone's going to be here and they won't be able to move on 54 if we don't if we don't provide for the future. So these are the things that we have to decide as um county commissioners. Um we h we have 600 right now 660,000 people. We're going to a million people. So um these roads are important and as Commissioner Oakley said, we need we need more more of these roads across the county and we're going to keep working on it and uh so that's where I am on this one. Thank you,

Commissioner Waven.

Yeah, thank you, Chair. I'm still hung up on the intersection of 54 and gun. The answer that we received was somewhat vague when I had I think it was were you on the teams? Were you on the call? Were you the engineer on the call and we discussed really the crux I mean we can build a road on ramp off ramp four lanes whichever option but it's all for nothing if it's a bottleneck at 54 and gun. I think the success of this project hinges on the intersection of 54 and Gun Highway. And I need some more clarity on that before we spend a pile of money going going literally down this road. It's going to bottleneck and be stuck like 54 and 41. There'll be that much volume. There might be a parallel reliever, but it's all going to go it's going to land in one spot.

Why? Why are you saying that?

Why am I saying that? because in our briefings when we had with engineer and panos and others talking about that intersection talking it through um they also shared similar concerns that that intersection could end up being stuck. I don't know if you remember correctly,

if we have the interchange, there's possibilities,

not without

the an the answer that I received from staff was yes, there were potential concerns about that that intersection. An answer that was given to me today was, oh, let's build the road and then we'll see what the how the problems are now later. I think that if if this whole roadway network is planned to be proactive, that interchange needs to be ran with by working with DOT simultaneously to set up the success for this road and for the future. And basically what I heard today was, well, pick a design, build it, and then we'll see if that interchange is bogged down. That intersection is bogged down. Then we'll go to DOT and fix it. And then we'll have 18 studies later, and we'll be like 54 and 41, and we're talking about it for 16 years. So, I think now's a a good opportunity to take a look at that intersection. And I know you talked about how the seconds were a little bit more, but I'm not overly I'm not overly convinced there. And I I want some reassurances that the intersection of gun and 54 will be sufficient. And I'm not confident. Uh and what I'm hearing today that it will be. So that's not a hit on you. I just think who can predict in a crystal ball 40 years out? It it's 25 years out. It's very difficult. But seeing real life, what we all live in, traveling across this county, real life today, postcoid, boom, everybody's moved here. We're stuck everywhere you go. There's road construction everywhere. Um, this is an opportunity for us to be proactive. And uh, for all the folks who are living in this area, I think that that that's why everybody's here today. I mean, we received hundreds of emails. Um, and thank you all for reaching out and emailing us and and showing up today and spending your day engaging in this process. And so as we're all going through this together, I think we need to look at the whole corridor. I mean, there's a lot of money that's going to be spent here. So that's that's that's where I'm I'm at within this within this project. So I wouldn't I'd be okay if we continued it till we got some clarity and we added uh some more dialogue and let the residents see, you know, better graphics just like we do with the budget. um and then come back and and talk about it. That way everybody has a thorough understanding and we're all comfortable with it. Uh we have a very expensive decision to make and our expensive decision is going to directly impact the lives of all these folks here. So I think everybody needs for the most part needs to be in agreement. So with that I I I'd be inclined to support a continuence and get some more clarity from staff um on the bigger picture of this interchange.

Okay. So, and and I agree with I think continuous is the best thing to do at this point, but I want to go over some points. Um, one of the things I think it's going to this project would slow down anyway because as you heard the civil engineer say, changing from two lanes to four lanes to six lanes is going to arterial status.

So, I can guarantee you if you saw 250 emails coming, you're going to see a lot more resistance coming through. They're going to be in court anyway. my opinion when you look at let me continue when I look at

a question

no I want to continue first um when I look at um the planners they should be involved with this directly to see if we are in that situation are we going against the comp plan as transportation you're not going to know that you're not going to know that we need an expert to know and and that probably would have slowed this thing down worthy discussion from the building price and I frankly don't like the the way it's listed as preferred as far as the alternative. I think it's a very very bad way to go. You could say suggested latest proposed something like that, but preferred is the wrong language to use. It sends the wrong message because it's preferred by who? When I look at 191 millions to 142 million. We just went through uh Ridge Road, long project, 23 years to go through the process. A lot of things happen in that. Uh even CSX, the latest $225 million building a solid bridge as opposed to the bridge we're going to go build. That road project, the final phase is the most expensive phase. It should have been the cheapest. I don't know how we're paying for that. Never mind how we're going to pay for this. So to go spend a hundred of let's say $50 million extra on the case that maybe the turnpike authority who has not been our best friend and has not been the most easy to plan with every step of the way to let them go determine what's going to happen to this neighborhood if something's going to happen is a tough change and something I didn't think about one lady mentioned about what with the way this whole area has changed it was brought up once before way back when commissioner Starky when we designated all the employment centers around the We picked all the interchanges. This is one of them that was supposed to stay with commercial all the way in the corner. And then when this section here was brought in and we had all this development was going to come in, we need density. We need density. We density. I said we need jobs. And we brought the density in. Well, that residential part is really making this a lot more dangerous to that south part of this whole complex. So that push getting that approved was a big detriment to this whole area my opinion and that's why I fought against it. Um, when I look at alternate A, it makes a lot of sense. If we have Amazon trucks that have now been approved to come in there, if we do put the Amazon uh interchange in and Amazon, you get a driver that's driving and where do you think they're going to turn? If you get a path, back path, they're going to drive right up and right through these neighborhoods with these trucks and we've seen them. They come come everywhere. Um, they're just going to find their easiest path. And those trucks are going to make it very dangerous for the community. You got those big trucks that don't make any sounds. Guess what? Some kid doesn't hear it, looks both ways, didn't see it. Bam. We don't we don't want to deal with that. When I look at talk about safe and walkable, this goes completely against that. And here's something. We're

talking about quality of life, right? That's what we try to do is make citizens quality of life better. We haven't even done the noise studies, the the sound barriers that we're going to probably need out there. Do you think we should see what those barriers need to be to protect these people from the noise? Because noise pollution is a bad. It's a bad thing for quality of life. Um, so back to the turnpike authority, they should be at the table with you. If we're going to look a talk about a plan that's going to go somewhere six lanes anywhere and have an interchange, that should be factored in now. So when I do my planning, I get it programmed ahead of time and at least the people that live there will know what's coming, just like a comprehensive plan, just like these master plans that they signed up for was supposed to be a a simple collector wrote. All that's got to be looked at. We're not ready for that. um no costs available. You can't know the cost what they're going to be in in 15 years anyway, but you don't even know what the costs are now to go take and build the bridge. And frankly, it's $50 million more to get ready for what what you might use or might not. And frankly, if I got to go take $50 million, the first thing I'd probably want to do is fix that gun interchange right there. And I'd want to go build the rest of Sunlake because that will immediately relieve traffic all the way through. Um, and we got to watch the density we're putting out everywhere. You keep on putting density, you're going to get more and more traffic. It's not going to change. So, with all that said, I think we need to continue this thing. Get it to where you can do more research with Turnpike. You can get your numbers together. You can show us the map that shows clearly the six lane where it's going to be. So, when looking at a preferred alternative, we can see what it is. But clearly, we're not ready. And I tell you, the people are engaged. I've never seen so many emails so quickly. That tells you that these people who are very intelligent, very smart, very caring about what they bought into, we're changing all that. And I think if we're going to do that, we need to do it through at least another public meeting with the people, but you need to do more research, too, so that you can actually show them exactly what they're going to get.

Commissioner.

Yeah. Um, is there any way before we um if everyone as a like you know a board the board decides to continue it um you could get with FDOT to see where there where they are with gun expanding gun? I I can ask but as I know right now they don't have any plans to improve it in the near future but I can re research that further

and then maybe you know as a you know we could just put maybe move it on our priority list you know for the MO. I don't know how you guys feel about that, but to make that connection, I mean, even if we don't

even if they let's say it just is four lanes with no no interchange, it would be nice to have that gun highway connection.

So, Mr. Sty,

um, can I speak to the Yeah.

engineer and y'all? Um,

on Gun Highway, it is a two-lane divided now, right? Four-lane divided,

correct? So, it is a four-lane divided. Um, is there a light at Lake Point?

Yes.

Signal at Lake Point?

Yes.

So, people who I mean, I drive this area all the time.

I'm at gun 54 all the time. Um, if if you're coming off the Sun Coast and and and going south on Gun because maybe you're heading to Lowe's. I don't know. You're heading into Hillsboro County to go through that intersection. Otherwise, you're probably turning right or I mean the traffic or going through to go to Starky Boulevard, you'd stay on rangeand. So, I I know I saw that became a problem with the interchange and without some other relievers, it could stack, but that how bad is it without the interchange?

I think commissioner, I think that's a good point. the the traffic where where it's really a concern is a 2050 with the interchange now under any any conditions that that intersection itself is already at a deficient level of service. The failing movement I believe is the the left turn is it southbound left turn onto state road 54. Is that the one that's so that's the what the the reason that this is is basically this is not part of the study limits. So the improvements to this intersection we're not making an opinion. We're not saying that they're not warranted. That's definitely something that that is that could be benefit to the county independent of this project, but any any study has to have a beginning and an end limit because otherwise the domino effect would take you all over the the county's roadway network. So the as when we evaluated it for traffic, we look beyond just the limits of the improvements that we're considering and we consider the effect on the whole network and that's that's when we identified that that left turn movement would need to be improved. It could just be one of those things where you'd have to develop dual lefts in order to allow more cars to to make the same cycle. But that would be a separate uh separate consideration because the state would have to be directly involved in that consideration because they're saying their state

left on Gun Highway onto State Road 54. Is that what you're saying? Heading

east on 54.

I believe it's the southbound uh it would have been southbound to to uh eastbound movement. Our traffic engineer who did the traffic studies started to come up before but we did he didn't get a chance. So can you explain this?

State your name. Yeah, my name is Fat Abdullah. I'm a traffic engineer with KCA. Yeah, gun highway is near capacity now and even with the no build alternative, it will uh turn into level of service if which is a failing level of service. So, gun highway need to be gun highway intersection with 54 need to be fixed regardless of the project. Of course, our project will bring more traffic to Gun Highway at 54 and and it's not only the project, the development in the area will bring more traffic to those intersections and gun highway intersection is one of the busiest intersection in the area there.

Okay. And and um which so I was having a trouble understanding which way he was saying is the stacking problem now.

Yeah. If I can look at the for example the no build alternative level of surface analysis there which is the capacity analysis at the intersection I see the eastbound is is having significant delays over

eastbound through

eastbound uh through

eastbound on 54.

Yes. Yeah.

Alternate road there wouldn't be as many people on there

at gun and 54.

If we have what? Sorry.

If we had rangeand there would be less traffic on 54.

Yes. Yes. Yeah. On the Yeah. On the build alternative. Yes. Yes.

That that is correct. So for example, that specific movement I just mentioned,

it goes from one 140 second delay to 120 second delay. So we have less congestion when we add the rangeand.

Okay.

But it it does relieve some traffic on 54.

Okay. That So um then and then we have the light at Lake Point. So, I'm I'm thinking of traffic coming back at the end of the day. Um, they can come down Lake Point and turn right on 54 and not and go through gun, not turn on Gun, not Stash on Gun. They can come down Lake Point. They can come down Cattle Gap,

wherever this next road is that comes between Lake Point and Cattle Gap. Um, so there's a lot of ways to get to 54 besides gun 54. That's kind of what I'm seeing.

You can see that in the traffic analysis numbers as you go along Rangeland Boulevard away from the Sun Coast in the alternatives that we looked at with an interchange that you see that the traffic drops off as you go past all those other side roads. So there there is there would be there would be traffic that could take any of those and and it's modeled that way. So u but the condition that that is currently existing where there isn't enough capacity at gun highway is is that intersection alone would would still need to be considered for improvements because even under the no bill condition that that's still a traffic issue.

Well I I'm a little frustrated that we're letting we just had Lowe's come in and um those businesses on the upper corners if we knew we were running into trouble there. Why did we not take that into account before we approved those site plans if we need if we needed something? So that's shame on us there. I mean is one one of our departments not talking to the other if we needed to put in another lane. Is that what No, uh Terry because like you said planners.

Yeah.

Victoria's planning development economic growth. The question on Lowe's was that it was a Uklitian resoning at that time. So there were it was not possible to uh mandate some kind of condition on them to fix something.

Is that a rule that we have ourselves with Uklinian? Is that something we need to fix?

You can't you can't condition a Uklitia a straight reszoning is what Terry is saying. But the planite

the site plan should have required it. And I believe

they they did build

they did they dedicated right of way when that Lowe's came in along highway.

They they built the

talk about the north side

the right turn lanes on the southbound side.

There's there's dedicated

there's a dedicated turn lane coming eastbound on 54 and there's also southbound gun a dedicated turn lane.

Okay. So, so we don't need an improvements at gun

in 54.

Well, to get from level service F to a better level service, yeah, you need to make some improvements. Now, we have to look into where those improvements have to go to be the most efficient uh operation. Um, FI just mentioned that it's the south to east movement that's failing. Uh, however,

but rangeand would help that.

Yes. And so yeah, that so uh and that's what I said earlier this morning that between the no build and the built alternative A which is what we actually recommending here aside the future six lanes between South Branch and uh the roundabout. The difference in level of service at that particular intersection is minimal between no built and alternative A. We have no major impacts on that intersection with alternative A. Now when we build the interchange then yes that will have to be addressed and we will have to have major improvements.

Okay

so that's number one. Number two today we are not asking you to approve the interchange

or the widening of Rangeland Boulevard to six lanes. So the discussions about amending the comprehensive plan and all those are for a future action.

Okay. Today we are asking you to approve the fourlaning of Rangeland Boulevard as proposed in the preferred alternative.

All right. And the um and if we if so right now we're just reserving land. We're being we're being prudent and fiscally minded by reserving land in case it's needed. We may never need it. That's what we did on Trouble Creek. If you look at at Starky Boulevard and uh River Riveridge Boulevard and it extends onto Trouble Creek, we have saved land in case we ever needed to widen it. I don't and then we need to have the discussion if we're not going to widen it, but um to come back after we've built a road and try and buy land after the road's already built, that's not good use of taxpayers money. Um, and commissioner, what I wanted to say was if if six lanes is an arterial road, it's not in the neighborhood. It's from the Sun Coast to the Roundup.

That's not that's not in the neighborhood,

please.

So, uh, that's different than a six lane going through the N,

but it goes goes from the Sun Coast to the roundabout. Correct.

Correct.

It does not continue.

You guys, you have to be quiet. Am I am I saying something wrong? Is it going from the I need the professional?

Well, from South Branch, which is west of Sun Coast,

the Sun Coast to the roundabout

from South Branch, the entrance to the preserve to the roundabout. Yes.

And that's to get your turn lanes in. Get your turn lanes in to go

on and off the ramp.

Correct. Yes.

All right. So, gun highway is gun and 54 is worse without rangeand and um the sixth lane is not in the community. It's from the Sun Coast to the roundabout.

Who owns the property?

Please, not from the audience.

So, I'm I'm comfortable with with moving forward. I think it's the prudent civic thing for us to do. This is a road for the whole county. It's important to the whole county. It's been planned forever and I think you guys have done a a great job in calming traffic, making it safer for pedestrians.

Commissioner Weman,

I'm perplexed that the intersection of Gunam 54 is not part of the study. That was part of our conversation when we briefed a number of months back. I know there's a be there's limits to the beginning and the end, but this intersection is is paramount. Um, if it's not being incorporated in the study, not overly I I I think it needs to be incorporated within the study before we make make the the decision. Um, it needs to coincide with the decision of of what we do with this this project. So, I don't know what it takes to incorporate or merge the two studies or whoever is working on this, whoever the expert is on this intersection and and tie it in with this project, but I I think that's prudent to happen. And I think we need to hear, you know, when we reconvene and talk about it that it's it's it's a clearer picture. Um, there's been a lot of back and forth on this intersection. I felt some of the dialogue was a bit contradictory. Uh, I know because you guys are it's on the fly, but I'd like to see something a little more concrete. So, I again I'm I'm more comfortable with continuing it, not for a long time. Next board meeting here on the west side maybe. Um, and and making sure that we have all the pieces of this project looked at, dissected more clearly. Um, and I mean, we're talking 25 years, so what's a few more weeks, right? So I I I'm comfortable continuing for short period of time.

Mr. Chairman, if I may,

Mr.

So the board is entitled to any information they think is necessary to make a decision. I just want to point out that the study that is being proposed for your approval is a route study for the alignment of Rangeand Boulevard

and the ponds that would have to go with it. So it would not be it would not be something that you would have the intersection of 54 and gun as part of that study. Now, they can bring you back that information to help you make the decision of the of the alignment or the capacity of rangeand. But the the analysis that we need for condemnation, we need to go forward and build rangeand is the study that is being presented to you all. However, the problem with what we're looking at is the alternatives we've got, some of them are going to accommodate for a six lane or an interchange, which we may not want to do. That's not factored in here. So, with that, this interchange I think is important to look at. And I also think that subject separate from this exact study, but we got to go look at Sunlake and what the effects are going to be there and and put the cost analysis what it's going to be there because that's an immediate effect that doesn't even affect anybody. No one's there's no downtown. That road can be built like nothing. It's already there ready to go. So I think by looking at this, we should be looking number one, let's go look at what was spent on a Ridge Road, right? Because we don't know. We've all been briefed and and guess what I was like say like where that money coming from and they're just ready to keep on going. They're ready to keep on going here.

It's

somebody better fix this. We better fix that at at gun. We better go look at finishing Sun Lake and then go look at it. I don't think it can be done by the next board meeting. You've got I think they've got to take go put their cost numbers together. Once they put that together, then call for the meeting with the residents and then come back with a plan of what they're going to go do and at least be able to show us a map to what what what we're literally proposing for all the alternatives that are going to come forward. And certainly we need to change the name of preferred to a alternative or something but not preferred.

Mr. Chair,

Commissioner Starky,

I'd like to make a motion to approve the uh staff's recommendation. I'm making a motion to approve what staff has recommended

on the alternative A route study.

The preferred alternative or alternative A.

Yes. The

which one?

Preferred alternative A.

I'll second that.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

I'm just going to say I think we should definitely continue it. Uh we need to spend the time to do the research. We don't have it. And to throw 50 more million dollars when we may not even need it or want it. Um especially not looking at the other improvements, not even know what the financial costs are going to be to put the pen in place.

I'll call for the vote.

I'll make a motion to continue.

Let me now mine will die, but that's okay. Okay, we have to make decisions. So there was a move a motion to approve

a

alternative

alternative preferred alternative a how

preferred alternative is is what it's called alternative

there's a motion to approve alternative

of the preferred alternative all in favor say I

I

any opposed

nay. Notice 32 fails.

All right now

now motion to continue is appropriate. All right. So, I'll make a motion to continue and also with the information from the gun highway reaching Rangeland and also um one other neighborhood meeting.

Second.

Any further discussion? All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed?

Nay.

Okay. Motion passes 32. Thank you.

Okay. And I assume that's at the that's at the administrator's discretion when that is brought back.

So the administrator is going to ask some questions

time frame.

So on this continuence one um you know commissioner Mariano I hear what you're saying several months. What what exactly would the board like us to do? I've made notes on gun highway. I've made notes on cost analysis. I've made notes on an additional community meeting um which we we certainly can do the the community meeting piece will will essentially be the same alternatives but you'll you'll have the information before you. So I I do need some clarification on your

I think it's your discretion

when you put all the information together and you have the public meeting it's your discretion when you bring it back.

Okay.

Yeah. I have an idea that um part of this should come back with if we're going to do part A, which does rangeand, which I think helps relieve 54 and possibly gun somewhat. I think that should be part of it. And then the second part should be, you know, as you go forward to what you need to do at gun highway and and other areas. But you've got to realize that part A is going to help pitch four and gun highway at the beginning and then what you need to do after that.

And I I just have a comment that I encourage um my fellow teammates to come to the meeting, the next meeting for the road since it is so so you can talk to the residents and discuss all the options while we're there.

It'll have to be one-on-one. You have sunshine you got to worry about.

No, I'm talking about the neighborhood meeting.

I know. Yeah, but you can't all be there. You You can be You'd have to

The commissioner is correct about sunshine,

right? Obviously.

Yeah. Yeah.

Can't do that.

Okay. Items closed. Go to our public hearings.

First is P32. P32. We approve publication of the hearing of this matter in the February 4th, 2026 edition of the Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by certificate of um mailings and site postings.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Victoria's playing development comic growth. Item P32 is PTE 26006. This is an ordinance amending the pastor county comprehensive plan uh providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 and sheet 20 from con commercial to res 24 residential 24 dwelling units per gross acre on approximately 4.93 acres of real property located on Grand Via Boulevard approximately.3 mile east of the intersection of Caliente Boulevard and Land of Lakes Boulevard and providing for additional text amendments as necessary servability and an effective date. This comes to you with a recommendation to continue the item to the April 21, 2026 Florida County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard in Newport Richie.

Okay. Have a motion to continue P32.

Move.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Okay. And P33 conor plan amendment. It says consent. We shall have to vote on it. Um,

there's a title title update that I need to make for this item.

Okay. All right. So, P33.

Yes.

P33. We have previous proof of publication January 7th, 2026, supplemented by certificates of mailings and site postings for the February 17th, 2026 board meeting where it was continued to today. Item P33 is PTE 260011. Um this is uh and I'll read the change in title here because the agenda memo is different from what the title is on the agenda. So the correct title is an ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use maps 2-15 and sheet 12 changing from res 3 residential three dwelling units per gross acre to PD plan development on approximately 18.99 acres of real property located on the north side of state road 52 approximately 620 ft west of North Sun Lake Boulevard and a text amendment creating sub area policy flu 7189 state 52 2 Heasley PD and a map amendment to the future land use map 2-9 adding sub area map 2-989 state 52 Heasley PD and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repealer serverability and an effective date. This comes to you with a recommendation to accept public comment and adopt the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and ordinance by roll call vote.

Okay. Does anyone any questions for staff on this one?

Um Mr. Mr. Chairman, I just had a a a brief conversation with the applicant and um

well with the attorney for the applicant um requesting that they be sure and have a connection to the west into the uh elamp property that they can't there's no development to the west but certainly that can be an amenity for this neighborhood. Um they are connecting to the east to the commercial. Correct. And so she's she's agreed to that and so with that I'm fine with it.

Okay.

Well, I'm going to talk about other things later.

So as far as this this amendment here, we can deal with that when it comes to P40,

right?

That would be that would be appropriate for the MPD.

Okay. All right. All right. So no other questions for staff this time for public comment. Anyone for the public like to speak to item P33?

Just for the record, it noted that on the agenda it made reference to it's an extraneous comment for a consent. So

there is no consent agenda for ordinance. What I'm saying?

Yeah. Okay. All right. So um we need a motion to approve.

We get a motion already.

B3. We get a motion to approve.

All right. I'll move to approve.

Not my favorite project.

This on P33.

Yeah.

Okay. Second. Second. Okay. Now it's roll call vote.

District one. Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two. Commissioner Wakeman. I. District three. Commissioner Starky.

I.

District four. Commissioner Joerger. Hi.

District five. Chairman Marion. Hi.

Show it passes. 50. P34. P34. We have proof of publication in the Tampa Bay Times January 28th, 2026 for the February 17th board of county commissioners meeting where it was continued to today. Item uh P34 PD 26004. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section 802, tree preservation and replacement. Section 802.1 intent and purpose. Section 802.2 applicability, renaming section 802.3, tree removal to exemptions. Uh, creating section 802.4 tree canopy standards. Section 802.5 tree removal. Section 802.6 problem trees. Section 802.7 tree replacement mitigation. Section 802.8 8 protection requirements. Section 802.9 trees of special significance appendix A definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for servability inclusion into the land development code and an effective date. Uh there is a presentation uh for the board on this item which will be presented by uh Amanda Hill principal planner with the planning services division. The recommendation here is to accept the public comment adopt the proposed land development code amendment and ordinance by roll call vote. Uh also R30 on the agenda was to be heard together with P34. Would the board want the presentation on the resolution first or on the land development code amendments first?

We need to adopt the ordinance first and then take up the resolution.

Very good chair.

Commissioner W. Thank you. U Mr. Goldstein this is what we discussed earlier. This is not what we offer.

So I think

I think the commissioner's concern was whether the it was about the cap. Correct.

Yeah.

Whether that would adequately protect heritage trees.

This is where we discussed this portion that we discussed this morning.

Correct.

Okay.

Um and I have discussed your proposal with staff. Um I don't know if staff has prepared language to address it or not. Have you?

Not directly. We were waiting further board discussion and direction on the matter.

Okay. Well, we'll have a presentation and then we'll get into

Yeah, I can wait. After she does a presentation, we can discuss it some more.

Okay. Thank you.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Amanda Hill, Planned Development, Economic Growth. So, the purpose of this amendment is to conduct a comprehensive update to section 802. As you know, uh, tree preservation and replacement of the LDC to enhance tree protection within the county as directed by the board. The adoption of these proposed amendments will set the effective date of the new contribution rates for the tree mitigation fund as approved by the board. So during our public hearing on January 6th, the board directed staff to remove the previous references to the contribution rate in the land development code. These have since been removed and the contribution rates will be exclusively referenced in the resolution for the tree mitigation fund. There is also a walk-on edit from staff for section 802.4B6 to close a potential loophole for eligibility for the preservation incentives. And before I continue, I was remiss in not mentioning that the public comments were received after the agenda was published for today's meeting, and these have been sent over to the clerk's office for the file of record. Just noting it for the record. So, there are a couple other items that were discussed by the board at the January 6th meeting and I'm going to run through those um in terms of the additional items for discussion and research as requested by the board. Uh staff was asked to further consider how the code might provide relief for commercial developments that are not exempted from the canopy preservation requirements. So, commercial development seeking regulatory relief would be able to request an alternative standard in accordance with the existing provisions allowed by section 47.5 of the code. And these alternative standards would also be applicable to non-commercial developments. Per the board's request, we looked at trees and storm water ponds and how the code speaks to that. So for ponds that are visible from the ride ofway, trees are required to be installed at a rate of one shade tree per 50 linear feet. And in the case that they're not visible from the right of way, they are not required. To further address shade trees and nutrient pollution in canals language has been included in the amendment that further clarifies when palm trees may be substituted when replacing shade trees.

Can I ask a question?

Mr. Starky,

I just thought about this. So what kind of tree needs to be spaced 50 apart? Is it a tree with a certain size canopy or could

be a shade tree?

A shade tree.

But if it's not a shade tree with a canopy, then should they be closer?

Potentially, but the code doesn't speak to that. It specifies one shade tree per 50 linear feet.

Aren't we redoing the code right now?

Yes, we are.

So, I'm wondering if we should restrict like that's I mean I I I see that for a live oak, but if you're putting in palm trees.

Well, palm trees supposed to be three to one. So, I want to make sure that that's secure. But if we're putting in a cypress tree or what are those trees that are Italian kind of they go straight up?

Italian cypress.

Italian cypress. Does that count? You put one every 50 feet. That would look really stupid. So, we need to put some kind of language that it has to do with the size of the canopy. But I think they're saying that they wouldn't be classified as canopy trees, so they wouldn't qualify. But I'll let Patrick answer that question.

And and aren't aren't palm trees three to one? Because you didn't say that in your statement right there. The rate is three palm trees grouped together from one shape. Yeah. But I think we need to be care careful. Maybe you have a definition of a shape tree versus a tree. So, uh, you you rais a fair point. Um, so right now our code, no this is 802. Um, 9052 landscaping buffering talks, I'm sorry, Patrick Dutter, development review first. Um, 9052 talks about new development and what you need to do for new development. That's where it talks about the rate of trees along the pond. Right now, you're correct. It vaguely just says trees. It's not specific. Now, we are going to have hopefully code adjustment language to you soon to propose requiring street trees in residential subdivisions along with some additional tweaks and changes we're going to be making. I'll include that with the 9052 changes to be specific about I was already planning on making tweaks to the pond trees because right now it's one per 50 linear feet, but it really it should allow some variety so you're not planting one every 50 ft. That's going to look a little odd.

So, to allow them to group them to make it look a little more natural. Um, that's going to be a part of our adjustments that I'm going to be bringing to you hopefully in a few months for the 952 changes.

50, the right spacing.

Uh, when I bring that uh change from 9052 to you hopefully in a few months, we can further discuss if if we want something a little bit different than 1 to 50

because often times it ends up being one.

I'm sorry.

And it can end up being one

Italian cypress tree.

If you want to give me a suggestion now, I I can So, so the section we are amending is preservation and replacement. Correct. The commissioner is talking about the landscaping section

which is 90. Correct.

We'll talk about that when we change that I guess.

Yes.

And maybe staff needs to do a little research to see what Sarasota

We'll do that

you know and other counties.

Absolutely.

All righty. So um the board asked for additional details regarding the age of mature uh heritage trees. So live oaks and southern magnolia commonly live in excess of 100 years and this is one of the reasons why those species were selected as heritage trees because of their long-term resilience. The board also requested staff to investigate current provisions for irrigation in the code. So section 905.4 Four includes a description of the types of systems, system specifications, a requirement for design and installation to meet Florida Irrigation Society standards unless superseded by the code, a requirement to submit an irrigation site plan at the time that the construction plan is submitted or building permit if the site development has been completed. And I also included here the applicability of that section of the code as well as some of the exemptions that are currently there. And those were all the changes that we have made to this section of the code per our previous discussion on January 6th. So, as previously mentioned, this item comes to you with a recommendation for approval.

Okay. Any questions for staff? Does the public want to come forward to speak on this item? We're going to hear we're going to hear the next item after it, but

we'll come back to it.

We have three signed up for this.

Okay. Julia Partic Julia Bartunic 2645 Meadowwood Drive, Florida New Florida. Um, first I'd like to thank Katherine for initiating uh this tree ordinance strengthening after the public outcry of Newport Corner's development adjacent to our river. Thank you to Pasco County Planning Amanda Hill and David Engel for their hard work to include preservation and incentivization to preserve trees. Hopefully we will get more resiliently sustainable projects. Firstly, we do not want minor rural subdivisions to be exempt from canopy preservation standards. Due to state preeemptions and exemption loopholes in what is a stronger ordinance than we had before, we are requesting an increase to 30% canopy preservation, similar to Elatchua County. This can be amended right here today. Due to the fact that the state preeemption exemptions weakened the 20% canopy preservation standards, we need to increase that to 30%. We also wanted this statement under bonafide a land section. Tree removal under this exemption shall be limited to the minimum extent necessary for active agricultural production and shall not include clearing conducted primarily in anticipation of development of land speculation or all of this. Tree removal under bonafide agricultural exemption shall only be permitted when the property owner demonstrates active agricultural use of the land. Documentation shall include at least one of the following current agricultural classification pursuant to section 193 461 Florida statutes. The county administrator or designate may deny use of this exemption if evidence indicate the property is not actively engaged in legitimate agricultural production. Yes, in the ordinance there is a 5-year hold until developments permitted on a land, but that length of time is a blink of an eye for an investor. Thank you so much. I would like to submit uh this for public record, please. um with the change.org petition for 30% canopy preservation. Thank you.

Move to receive file.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I. Who's next?

Nancy Hazelwood. Since you said my name, can I just say 34110110? A nice place.

You know where you are?

We should get you a name tag.

Yeah. Okay. Hello y'all from the northeast rural area. I know staff has been working diligently on the tree ornaments. Thank you for your time and dedication staff. Uh and I heard that you got a lot of communication on this tree ordinance. We all are involved. Uh this is an important subject and there's a lot of pens up here and um the people of Pasco have been upset with all the clear cutting across the county. I was surprised that the county didn't set up meetings for non-stakeholder citizens. Um, one for each district would have been great. So, we had input right at the beginning to help write the ordinance. We used to do things like that. Mr. Mariana, you remember? Yeah. On the topic of saving 20% of the trees, this means to me that the commission is willing to let go of 70 or 80% of the trees in Pasco County. The trees in Pasco County are our natural resources and our water supply. And here's a question. Can a child live with only 20 or 30% of his body? I don't think the trees can either. So, um, you can't expect our natural resources to survive what is needed, the flooding and our water resources. So, let's move on to exemptions. The minor rule subdivision is a problem. These are exemptions that will impact immense areas of the county. And here's um an ordinance that says that we can get along with destroying up to 100% of our natural resources since you're exempting them. Remember that this is all tied together. Commercial exemptions are also a problem. 5 acres or less, all the trees cut. And I understand that you've got uh a uh landscaping ordinance, but I'm not seeing that as being much of a help with hot asphalt in in areas. So, we don't want to make more asphalt parking lots with no trees in them. If you could somehow make sure that they do a bit better. So why can't Pasco craft laws on the impact of growth and development is having on our county? So we we the non-stakeholders have more water and natural resources like what's what's that development going to do to the natural resources around it? What's the commercial going to do in natural resources around? Do you already have enough of that? There is what I'm asking. Thank you all for your attention.

Christy Zimmer.

Good afternoon. Christy Zimmer, 3615 Pine Cone Court, Little Lakes. Thank you for finally doing something about getting a tree ordinance in place. However, it's not enough. It really isn't. When we're looking at when I did the math and I did it real basic so I could get my head around it. If I have a piece of property and I have 40 trees on it and they're all 10 in each and I have to save 20% of those trees, that's only eight trees out of 40. That's not enough. That's not enough. Where is our oxygen going to come from from our children? If you haven't seen the movie Wall-E, you need to take some time and watch that movie. It's very real. And today's decision will impact the future of our children big time. Um, you can't let the minor rule subdivisions be exempt. That'll be taken advantage of by the developers and you know it. Let me tell you a little story about the old old oak trees. My tech, your lovely steel plant down in Zephr Hills, pulled out a one of the really old oak trees. I was told by the neighbors that it was over a hundred years old. And when they did, they hit a spring. And when they hit that spring, the water started flowing and it was beautiful and crystal clear. and they sent me lots of pictures. They then had to dig canals in three more retention ponds, which were not part of their permit to contain the water until they could get the big boulders to drop into the hole to slow down the water. Well, Pasco County doesn't do a whole lot when it comes to code enforcement. I'm not real impressed with the problems that we've seen, but I went ahead and called Swift Mud and I filed a report and they said, "Yeah, that's a problem." Then I get a call the very next day from a code officer in Zepper Hills asking me do I have a problem? Yeah. Well, I might what? And he said with the steel mill plant and I said yes. So I told him the story and he said well yeah that is a problem. And Swift Mud told me they were not permitted for three retention ponds. So they had to go back and fill them in. What happened to them? Absolutely nothing. They didn't even get a slap on the hand. They got $6 million worth of tax abatements as an incentive. Nobody has done anything about this tree and the damage that it's caused and what they've done to impact that hole with the aquafer. Think about what you're doing. Please protect these old old trees. Don't let them pull them out as part of this. Let the old old oak trees be part of the exempt that they can't touch. Let's do that. we have to find a way to control this development. And well, we say all the time they they're allowed to do what they want with their land. Here's an opportunity for you to put some tight restrictions on these developers to slow this mess down. Let's not make it 20%, let's make it 30, 40, 50% of the trees have to remain. I did a development in Odessa. It was a 100 acre track of land. I could have had 47 homes in there. It had 40% wetlands. I only built 17 home sites. Good development can be done. Let's focus on that. Please save our trees.

That's all who have signed up in advance.

Okay. Anyone else in the audience like to speak to this item? Come forward, please. Anyone else? Please line up behind her.

Hi, my name is Kathy Julian. Oh my gosh, I never have my ringer on. I live Where do I live? 10232 Worthy Lamb Wagne Port Richie. Um, in 2022, the county created the Swopee MPUD on the south side of State Road 52 between Aaron Cutoff and Bellamy Brothers Boulevard. The MPUD has approved maximum zoning entitlements for up to 953 single family homes, 119 town homes, 60 600 apartment units, and 120,000 ft of commercial on approximately 493 acres. The buildout complete year noted in the approval was 2030. In 2024, the county created the Kokus West MPU, which is on the west boundary of the swope. This MPUD has a maximum zoning entitlements for up to 155 single family homes, 67 town homes and six 168,000 square feet of support commercial and 120,000 ft of corporate business park target industry light industry and associated infrastructure. In late 20 in late February of this year, the developer Lenar submitted a mass grading site for part of this project with within the Kokalakus West MPUD which will clear some areas and add various storm water systems such as a pond in anticipation of future building. This includes the removal of 245 trees totaling 37,583 caliber in. The project requires 15,821 caliber inches of replacement trees. Um, because the site cannot accommodate all the replacement trees, a fee of $111,000 was calculated. Where do these funds go? How do where do we replant these tri trees? How does the public understand what's going on? Because all we see is I drive down 52 all the time and all I see is the beautiful areas that used to be there no longer are beautiful. their ugly mud and they all have campaign not campaign they all have uh developer signs on them that correlate with uh elected officials campaigns. Um where where are we re planting these trees? We're not or are we how does the public find out? When I've asked for how many houses have been approved to be built, nobody can give me that number. Do we have these this data? I can't believe we don't.

We don't answer during this time.

No, I get it. But just stay tuned.

Hello, my name is Jose Alejandro Freightes. I live on 1822 Cypress Bay Parkway, Lando Lakes, Florida. Good afternoon, and I would just like to preface to say thank you to all of Pasco County for all that you guys do. Uh, and thank you for the opportunity and the time to speak with you all today. I'm a 20-year-old Pasco County native. I've lived in the same house on the same street in the same neighborhood for the majority of those 20 years. I remember my friends and I would run around the outside. We would fish, play baseball, play football in the street, and when it got so hot in the summer, we would go into the forest and build forts shading us from the sun. We were outdoor kids. I still am. But those times are changing as I see the same trees being cut down for development. The once green, luscious scenery of a variety of flora has been reduced to a measly new shopping centers, parking lots, and some mediocre fast food chains. Trees are a net positive as they reduce carbon emissions, reduce damage from natural disasters, and provide shading. Climate change is a real and existential threat, not to not only to our community of Pasco County, but to the planet. As each year gets progressively hotter, breaking records, storms become stronger, costlier, and more dangerous. And Lord knows that the current big weeks in the administration up in Washington don't give a single rule about us. They don't care if the hurricanes get stronger or if it gets harder and we ain't got no shade. But you can. You commissioners can care. As our local government officials, it is your duty to bring progress and prosperity to our community. As land is needed for development and community, development can be seen as a prosperous net positive. I challenge and ask you, how positive can it truly be if what we leave future generations are plots of developed real estate with no sustainable way for life to continue prosperously. Deforestation will lead to worse conditions, stronger storm consequences, and heavier expenses. No one will want to live here anymore. That is not the future that I want for my future kids or any generation to come. So I plead, I beg and I beseech you to vote to strengthen the ordinance. Help preserve our trees and in doing so you will be preserving future generations. Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. My name is Andrew Smith. I

You can lift that up.

Excuse me. Good afternoon commissioners. My name is Andrew Smith. I live at 7066 Columns Lane and I am also chairman for Pasco Hernando Democratic Socialist of America and I come out here to speak in support of this ordinance. Being a fifth generation Floridaian from Leburg, I have seen the damage that uh instances like the villages can do to where it becomes uninhabitable to the people who live there and unrecognizable to the people who have grown up there. my mind, Florida is a tourist state because it has a natural beauty to it that cannot be replicated. Fauna and flora that is unn matched by almost half the world alone. To me, you as county commissioners have the power to be able to control the development in a a manner that makes it accessible and livable for the citizens that live here. I hear from the past ordinances about the Beexley uh expansion and so forth that that is a prime uh commitment. So I beseech y'all in the same manner as my peers and so on before me that the manner of keeping it a natural livable land for all of us that live here to make sure that it is maintains its natural beauty instead of looking at the business dolls that come with it. With that I want to leave y'all with a quick question of when you vote think about what type of color grain really matters to y'all and I resend my time. Hi, my name is Linda Blake. I live at 5743 Illinois Avenue in beautiful downtown Newport Richie. And I just want to thank you all for even the idea of having a tree ordinance. I really praise you all for that. And we've got a problem. The population is growing. People want to move here. How do we preserve nature in Pasco County? It is a difficult problem and it's going to take a lot of creativity. Now, this is a Tuesday in the middle of the day and most people are so busy that they don't have time to be here. In fact, we had probably a dozen people that were here that had to go. They had to get back to work. They had appointments to go to. They were wearing green. You might have seen them and they had to leave. I have talked to people that are Republicans, Democrats. I know a lot of people in Pasco County. I've lived here for a really long time, for decades. Nobody is happy to see the forests bulldozed. It's a difficult problem. How do we build houses and still preserve nature? So, you know, if this were a Saturday, this room would be packed. There would be an overflow crowd in the lobby. We all want to see a lack of pavement, a lack of the buildup of heat. It doesn't matter what party you're in. It doesn't matter if you're a socialist, a liberal, a conservative. This is a problem that needs to be solved. And I'm hoping that you've heard really listen to the people here and that you can put your thinking caps on and talk to people who have done it, who have created communities that are sustainable. It can be done. It can be done. But it takes research. It takes creativity to do so. And I know that you folks elected to this incredible

opportunity to lead in this county can do that. I know that you can be creative. I know that you can do research and I know you can solve this problem in a way that makes this county as beautiful as it has always been. Thank you so much. Good afternoon. My name is Maryanne Bishop, 22843 Hail Road, Land of Lakes. Um, thank you for this uh tree ordinance. Uh, thank you, Commissioner Starky, for seeming to care about trees as much as or close to as much as I do. Thank you, Commissioner Mariano, for mentioning that maybe we wouldn't have so many problems with the roads that I was listening to if we didn't approve so much development. Um, ironically coming in and hearing about the beex develment this morning Io we hosted at Rosebud Continuum in Land of Lakes um more than 50 uh first grade students to come out and teach them about plants and trees and the importance of them. And to see the expression and how happy they were and how much fun they had just learning about trees really hits home the fact that we're taking down way too much in the way of trees. Um, I don't have a like completely I just put pulled some things out because I h didn't know if I was going to make it on time here today, but I wanted to say on the old oaks that y'all are talking about that that's a keystone species. Uh, a old oak supports more life forms than any other North American tree. It's terrible to think about taking down these old oaks. Um, os also provide carbon sequestration and storage, air quality, erosion control, transpiration, and cooling. Um it says a single ornamental tree is better than nothing but one tree supports a fraction of the species that a layered canopy does. This is the problem that I have with that one tree here there and the other. Trees do communicate. They do have they are their own they they communicate with each other. They are their own envi they their own environment. I can't think of the word neighborhood. They work together. They work much better together than they do separately. So, it's not a great idea to tear it all down and then plant these trees back. Um, the easy the fix is the easiest to do is to keep what you have. A mature oak or maple already supports hundreds of insect species, which means food for dozens of bird species. Removing a healthy tree erases decades of habitat in one afternoon. These are things that we need to think about. Um the other thing um just another fact is old growth and young forest play crucial roles in carbon storage. Older trees store large amounts of carbon while young fast growing trees absorb CO2 quickly. Planting new trees and maintaining existing forests are equally important. New trees help restore degraded land while established forest maximize carbon storage and um sustain biodiversity. Um, and just like there's a very important micro forest. That's what I was talking about that micro forests do so much more than individual trees. If you you can take down a hundred trees in a forest situation and replant 100 trees every 50 ft and there

is no comparison to the value of those two systems. The micro forests are so much more beneficial. We really need to think about that when we're talking about these developments and how we're allowing them to take it down. Now, I am somebody who puts my money where my mouth is. I have the 19 acres and to some of you, I think that we're here, C. Uh, Commissioner Starky and Jack Mariana, you were both part of it. Um, I just want to say from a a language from a native, we don't have to heal the earth. She can heal herself. All we have to do is stop making her sick. Thank you very much for your time.

Hi, Jasmine Forkin. I live in Clear Water, 100 He Road, unit 203. I also have 10 acres in Pasco in um Hudson 14191 Family Trail. Uh when I purchased these uh 10 acres um uh almost 30 years ago, I u saw this sign on the road and this is the place where I wanted to live after I retired. However, this sign doesn't really mean anything anymore. There is no more open spaces or vibrant vibrant spaces places. It's all being developed and it's being developed in such a hurry and in such a manner that um is um it's safe to um see tracks of land on left and right of Hudson Avenue totally bulldozed over. Not a tree left. Um, all you can see is signs uh for sale, sold, or already being developed. Um, I don't know if I would buy this land today after seeing what's going on. Um, mature trees are treated like garbage. They've been burned instead of treated like resources. Uh, everything she said about mature trees, I was going to say, but um, she already did that. Um, they cut the trees. They pay nothing, almost nothing to do that. Uh, when I first bought my land, I had to build a small barn and I had to pay for each tree that was bigger than what was required. Now they burning these trees. They don't even use them to mulch. And uh if I don't know how they got these um permits to burn the trees um that could have been used for something even if it even if they were burned for energy like we burned garbage it would be something not just burn them for to eliminate them. There is not a tree left on my way from Cleora to my gate in Hudson. They are all gone and they're replacing them with these ornamental trees that will not sustain any life or be viable to humans for cleaning the air or anything at least in 20 years. Um, left and right on Hudson Avenue, every morning I come out, there is another um parcel gone. uh animals have no place to live anymore. The sand hill cranes are protected. You're not supposed to feed them. There's all kinds of laws about that. However, they have no place left to go. They cross the roads where people are driving 70 miles per hour. Um they end up on the roads as road kills. And I just don't know um how um are we going to leave this area to our kids and grandkids? I have more but my thumbs up. Thank you for improving this ordinance. Anyone else in the audience here to speak to this item? Anyone online?

No, sir.

Okay. This to the board. Um, Mr. Chuck,

um, question on the commercial that she brought up. What are our rules?

What What are the What are the our rules on a commercial 5 acre?

Uh, commercial developments 5 acres unless would be exempt under the currently proposed ordinance.

Exempt from what?

From having to maintain the 20% of existing tree canopy inches.

Okay. But they do have to replant.

They would have to meet the requirements of the landscaping code.

Okay. Um, can you show that picture I sent you, Gina?

Cuz to me, this is just absolutely horrifying. And I This is what I see all over the county. Um, our brand new Ashley furniture. I mean, how how that's okay is just mindboggling to me. Um

yeah,

uh Patrick Der development review. Um so yes, I think we've had conversations on this site before in the past. Um this plan was actually approved, so we updated the land development code in um 2022 to add some enhanced buffering requirements. This plan was approved prior to that time. So they were following our old code. again probably didn't add as much landscaping as they probably should have, but they were technically following the code at the time. In 2022, we updated the land development code to ask for um you know what we struggle with here are the overhead power lines. Um whenever there are overhead power lines, our land development code says that they're allowed to install understory trees. Um unfortunately, they uh chose crepe myrtle here. Uh we do have, like I said, part of that other update that I was planning on doing was to tweak what we're defining as understory trees. Um also tweaking what we call um shade trees because there are some shade trees that people are using as loopholes, like as an example, a Japanese blueberry tree. Um it could theoretically grow into a shade tree, but that's not what most people grow them into. So we're trying to clean that up.

Yeah. Um so so where are the parking lot trees? Never there's per do we don't we require perimeter trees and trees in the parking lot.

Yeah, just from what I can tell they chose to do the three palm. So the the parking stalls along the frontage they were did three palms instead of a shade tree and on the side um they again I can't see on the other side of the the picture but there are trees on the other side but they chose to do the three palms there.

Okay. So, I'm thinking what needs to happen is if the if if there's power lines in the way, they've got to put the edge of their pavement further away from the power line so that they can plant a shade tree.

They shouldn't be able to go all the way up to the power line and then say, "Oh, well, I can't plant a tree now because they're be under the power lines." Well, go 5t 10t back at least every so often so that we get something. But that's a great excuse to say we're just going to build right up to the power line. I agree and it frustrates myself as well. Um, part of my changes that are becoming hopefully in a few months will incorporate something that should hopefully address this is this issue for the the board to review.

All right. Um Um and to you know I think I think 20% saving 20% is a lot better than what we did before. We were saving zero, right? Um, but it's not it's not that you only have to save 20% of your canopy and that's all that's going to be there. We do have requirements where they have to put trees back in. Um, but in Florida in development, you have to bring in fill and um, if you fill around the trees, they're going to die. So, uh, that's that's why we were trying to strike a balance between saving some of the important trees that are on the property and then they would would replant. So, um, and and we've had a tree ordinance for a long time. I helped write it when I was on court. Gosh, before I was ever school board, remember? When's that in the '9s? We've just never updated like I don't know why we waited so long. Just like the neighborhood parks, we got to revisit that. Um, and we do have a tree mitigation trust fund. We set that up when we did that. Steve Booth's here, you were on Cork when we did the tree ordinance, Steve. Uh, we have a tree and we set up a tree mitigation trust fund. We have that here in the county and we are quickly um putting trees back into the community. You will soon see a bunch of trees come up Little Road in the medians. Um, if you drive around this campus, I've got them putting trees back in the parking lots here where um, they've neglected it since I've for 20 years. Um, look at the courthouse and look at the new trees. Drive behind uh, the county building and you'll What kind of trees did you guys put there? Who who remembers the name of those? Was it great?

No.

Jackaranda. Jackaranda trees, ma'am.

Jackarandas, which are absolutely beautiful with the the color flowers. So, um, we are putting trees back into the community and that's where the tree mitigation trust fund money goes.

Commissioner, Commissioner Jagger,

thank you. So this is I think this is one of the most consequential votes just like we discussed with parks at our workshop but the vote today is I think one of the most consequential votes that we'll take and it'll be the generations afterwards that will see the benefit of what we're beginning to do here today. Um I don't know if you guys have which we'll discuss it later in my commissioner it was house bill um what was it 399 David what was the number 399 was that number

yes it's 399

so this this bill can help curve the challenges that are looming down which we'll get into that separately later with development with house bill 399 and so I've I've gone back and forth with this cap the no cap for Upland acre cap for Upland acre um for what folks for what the the building community wants to spend or not spend. The the goal here is to save the heritage trees. And so I'm not sure who mentioned the Cocoalactis. I think Miss Zimmer or Mr. Julian mentions the Kokalakis property, but we pulled that we pulled the property on 52 since in district 2. 687 live oaks taken off of that site.

10 there's 101 live oak 10 in the smallest 10 in 101 live oaks at 10 in started there and goes all the way up to 57 in.

Are you saying they already cleared it?

That's what's going to be on the

what they do with the Kogan grass. So that's just live oaks of 687 live oaks and the replacement of for 222 residential units at 500 bucks a unit. That's how it came out to the 111,000. You know, the goal here is to save the heritage trees, the legacy trees around our county, having them put into flood planes and storm water ponds, that's just Russian roulette. Hurricane comes through, they're going to drown and die. And so trying to balance the idea depending on the board and how we land on something because I think a vote is important today. If there is a cap on the price per acre to develop, I would like to see an exemption for the heritage trees separate from the cap. So if you have a heritage oak tree and you want to take it out, that's a completely separate dollar amount. That's a completely separate piece of this ordinance because the goal is to save our heritage trees and replant replant the other trees. And so I think we need to define if there if the board does want to go with cap define what's in the cap and what should be excluded from the cap. And I think the heritage tree should be excluded from the cap from from from the cap. And I don't know how we do it if it's a a per inch or or whatnot, but we really the goal is to encourage a better type of development in this county. And to those who say don't for the minor rule subdivision piece, I'm going to be on the opposite side of the fence on this idea. And here's why. I think minor rule subdivisions should be exempt from the tree ordinance for this reason. Land is very, very expensive. It's now a luxury item. And so whoever is going to want to live, which we want to encourage that type of development, we want to encourage minor rural subdivision. We led the charge to revamp those development rules to try to encourage and make that lifestyle easier to get to in our county. And so if we exempt that exempt the minor rural subdivisions, it can help someone possibly afford that piece of land, 1, two, 5, 10 acres, whatever. because after they buy that piece of land in the minor rule subdivision, they're likely going to have a custom or semi-custom home built. And in today's market, there's some real estate folks out there, you're looking at a million dollars or more to live that lifestyle in our county, especially in the northeast rural area. So, if we start compounding the cost of trees and someone who wants to live that rural lifestyle, it's a bit of a gamble, but the likelihood of them saving their trees and just clearing where they want to want to put their house is probably more accurate. But if we take the cost of living the rural lifestyle and compound it, that could potentially discourage it. And that's something that I certainly don't want to see happening. So, I that's why I think that excluding the minor rural subdivisions is important. I know it's a bit controversial, but I think we're all on the same kind of path here on the

direction that we want to go with with more rural living. But back to the heritage trees and exempting them from what would be considered in the cap. I'd like to get the board's have the board's discussion on it or open it up about the price per cap um and or the percentage because I'm open to having a broader conversation on all those topics.

Commissioner Jagger. Yeah. Um I had made notes from last time. You had red line items, correct?

Uh can you clarify when you say red line

certain certain trees or things like that? You had you had red line items in the in the ordinance?

So 802 has the red lines for all the things that were changing. Um are you speaking specifically in terms of the heritage trees or something else?

No, I thought there was a list of different trees. Not to my recollection. No.

Okay. I just asked the staff because I had ma made notes just to make sure.

The only trees that we specifically identified are the live oaks uh 34 in and greater in diameter and the southern magnolia's 24 in and greater in diameter. And those trees would have to be in a condition rating of good or better for them to be considered heritage trees.

Okay.

At least that's what we're proposing.

Mr. Chairman.

Yes.

Um, Miss Zimmer's presentation, she intended to pass out an item to the board that speaks to the item that second

Commissioner Wakeman brought up. Second, all in favor say I.

I.

Thank you,

uh, I haven't had Commissioner Oakley go yet.

Okay, Commissioner Oakley.

I'm just thinking about the heritage tree. Is the heritage tree, of course, it's a magnolian and oak, but But is an oak that's 100 year old tree or more is it to be taken out or do we actually keep that tree?

There isn't any specification in the definition for the age. It's only the species, the size, and whether or not it's in the condition rating of good or better.

Yeah, that just a little concern about taking out our older oak trees like that. But I mean there's a lot of property that's got a lot of heritage trees and oak trees and bank notes that are very very important I think to our well-being in in this county and they've been there a long time but I'd like to see as many of those we could saved. Uh I don't want to take a dollar. It's hard to put a amount of money on a heritage tree that's something that's been there for over our own age. you know, 100 two year old 200 year old trees. I I have a little problem with taking those out to put in a few trees in. So,

so ultimately for the heritage trees, they would be a a higher fee for the contribution rates.

What would that pay be?

Regular trees would be at $75 per inch once the tree is at least 10 inches and greater. And for the heritage street would be at $150 per inch

per inch diameter.

Yes. Damn it. at breast height.

That's double.

Yeah.

Okay. All right. Mr. Start.

Well, I was trying to follow what Commissioner was saying when he said he wanted to exempt them. I didn't know which which way you were going with it.

I think he means that if there's a cap,

we'll save them.

He means that if there's a cap on the amount of the contribution that any heritage trees would be on top of the cap. that is that if they paid the cap amount that if they took out any heritage trees, they'd have to pay that on top of the cap amount. So, it would be the cap plus whatever they

took out in heritage trees.

It's to encourage keeping

Yeah. Because you could take out 50 heritage trees.

Save them. Yeah.

Yeah.

Because otherwise otherwise I think his concern is that if they just paid the cap amount, they'd have a financial incentive to take out the heritage trees.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I'm good with that. Um I I do have a question and I know this may not be the appropriate time but I did not know Kokalakus was cleared. I wanted someone in the county to ask answer me on who f how did we regulate their coven grass just just um

the the the project it hasn't they haven't started clearing yet but their application

okay well I want to know what what's happened with the coven grass before they start

um well I'm glad that we're charging a lot more for

Yeah she is Yep, I'm good.

Commission wait.

Anything else?

So, I I did notice we did have double for the heritage trees.

David Allen.

Yeah, just uh couple of things real quick for um procedural. I I think we're looking at the ordinance right now, which that's kind of the rules for the the the tree uh the tree protection piece. And I believe that um the cap that um Commissioner Weightman was talking about would be part of the second item that will be presented as far as part of the resolution for both the use and applicability of the tree mitigation fund.

Okay.

And I have a presentation for that as well for the board.

We got ahead of ourselves.

Okay.

Should we do the approval of this here first and do the other presentation? I would prefer that you adopt the ordinance and then go on to the resolution.

Okay. Very good. And I uh I do want to add I think you did a good job as far as looking at the ramifications financially that you put a good amount of work into that. So, thank you for that.

Um there you had passed out the sheet. I don't remember it being discussed. You wanted you want six added on.

I could just reiterate. believe I might have briefly mentioned it, but essentially um the walk- on edit was just to address some concerns that were recently raised that the section of the code that speaks to incentives could be potentially um used in a way that doesn't really reflect the intent of that section. So this section would be for persons who have preserved at least 20% of the existing inches and then they would be subject to have an opportunity for additional credits against the amount that they would have otherwise owed to the tree mitigation fund. But that would require first that they save 20% of the existing inches. So the change here uh for 802.4b6 4B6 is just to ensure that there isn't a loophole created where large land owners could potentially utilize this incentive but also have violations in terms of removing trees without the appropriate approval or contribution to the tree mitigation fund.

So I just wanted to make sure that if if the board makes a motion to approve the ordinance that it includes the this add-on of U

8024B6. Mhm.

Correct.

No. Let me just ask one question. As far as trying to protect the large trees, etc.

Are there going to be any provisions in there? Is there setting up their drainage? The drainage doesn't go around those trees and actually causes them to get wet and then topple over later on. Is there is there something in the code that we do to protect them?

We did consider that as part of the amendments to the section of the code. So for 802, give me a second. Let me just find the reference. 802.4 A 4C says for all sides subject to the provisions of section 802.4 of this code. A note shall be included on the plan said verifying that the proposed areas for tree canopy preservation are not within portions of the site subject to flooding resulting from elevation changes caused by fill associated with site development. In circumstances where this is unavoidable, appropriate drainage shall be included in the design of storm water facilities for the site to mitigate flooding of the preserved areas.

Okay, Mr. Wman.

So I want Mr. Craw. So for example, this station two in district 2 on 54 directly to the east there's a magnificent live oak. Before that station was built, tall tree. Now with that station built, with how much Phil's brought in, you're you're at the eye level at top of the canopy. I think is Chief Quinn still here. We were we were admiring it when we went to the ribbon cutting for the groundbreaking of it getting constructed. That's an example of what we're talking about here. I figure I'd use a county facility is the right the right way.

Yeah. We're where site development considerations make it impractical.

Yeah.

I move approve. to approve with the noted addition.

With the noted addition. Yes.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Any further discussion?

Okay. Roll call vote.

District 1, Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two, Commissioner Wakeman. Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

I.

District four, Commissioner Jagger.

I.

District five. Chairman Mariano.

I. Okay. Motion passes 50. Now we go to uh item R30.

Well, that's why we're done. R30 file number PDE 26-00005 is a resolution amending resolution number 25-291 of the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners by the county by the board of county commissioners sorry setting the rate for contributions to the tree mitigation fund the use of such funds and delegating authority to distribute such funds and repealer. So just for a brief history lesson here, uh the tree mitigation fund was originally established in 2001 with amendments in 2005 and 2008 to update the contribution rates and further direct the administration of the fund. On July 15, 2025, resolution number 25-291 was approved by the board to increase the contribution rates as identified on this slide. So, as I previously mentioned, uh, $75 per inch for all project types for trees classified as a heritage tree, a payment of $150 per inch. And I have here the definition for the heritage tree. And the resolution also revised the uses and administration of the tree mitigation fund. At the January 6 BCC meeting, the board directed staff to remove the previously proposed cap for the contribution rate of $3,500 per upland developable acre. And this is reflected in the draft that's currently in today's agenda packet. Now, this board direction elicited several discussions and comments from stakeholders, ranging from maintaining no cap to increasing the previous cap of $3500. And staff would like to bring to the board's attention that a cap would assist in providing stakeholders with a predictable cost for trees, which are essentially unable to be accommodated on the site. So, as previously indicated, staff would like to have some additional direction from the board as to whether or not a cap would be appropriate for the resolution moving forward. Other than that change, uh we discussed on January 6th some changes to the authorized expenditures in the resolution and for the most part, these have remained the same. There's one tiny change that staff has included here to further support other departments in meeting the the board's goal to increase the planting of trees in the county using tree mitigation funds. So we just added the word installation. So you could see there under proposal for amended resolution reimbursement for the installation, irrigation, landscaping design, mulching and repairs associated with canopy trees or landscaping plants or and shrubs on county owned or maintained property. So that's the only other change to authorize expenditures that we did from our discussion back in January.

Okay. So let me just go over the reimbursement part of installation, irrigation, etc. Um for instance, the steps to recovery program. We try to get them to save money so they can use the tree mitigation fund to actually do that other redevelopment stuff as well. So I don't know if the word should be reimbursement but once the work is done whether it be direct to the person who's getting the work done or the person who just did the work that's where the reimbursement should happen it's better for the cash flow such as the nonprofit and it could be the housing authority or whatever it may be. So I don't know if you want to say the word reimbursement or once installation's done contract gets paid or the person gets reimbursed but I think that option should be in there because you get some of these contracts will do the work and just get paid when the work is done.

So I did want to clarify that this item specifically is related to uh installations on county owned or maintained properties.

Yeah,

there's a separate item for public purpose. when we get the follow. So, let me wait for public purpose,

but I'm going to be the same question. You can think about it. Mr. Sorry.

Um, you know, I was against this at first because I want the money to go to put the tree canopy back in the county,

but if we're talking about and I'm fine with tree putting trees on back onto nonprofit property, but I'm not okay with doing everything else on noncount owned property. We'll go we'll go through the the tree money. We won't be putting the trees back. So, um, but I I have a question here with expenditure shall not exceed 50% of the total funds. The administrator and I had a conversation on this, but the next sentence is not what I thought we discussed. I thought it was per project, but you're saying expenditures shall not exceed 50% of the total funds used from the tree mitigation fund for the purchase of canopy trees in the previous year. So, it's the whole year, not just per project. And is that purchased and installed or I I just that gives me angst as well because my goal is to get trees back into the ground. Didn't we something that said what trees?

Are you waiting for response for that?

Commissioner, if I Oh, Mr. Engel's coming up. No, I was just going to whisper an amen.

Oh, okay. Hi. Um, David Engel, planning and economic development director.

So, I just wanted to maybe clarify a couple of things. F. First of all, the public purpose I I wanted to be clear and transparent with the board

that the board would have to deliberate on the use of funds for public purposes. The administrative discretion in the ordinance through the county administrator is for county owned or maintained properties. So if if there was a nonprofit that had requested some reimbursement or some funding, we'd come back with the board with that initiative for a vote. Is

is this like what we're doing on 19 with um your grants where they're matching?

Is that what you're speaking?

No, no, that that's the commercial landscaping grant.

Yeah,

that's done administratively. We have board authorization. So,

what money are you using for that? Well, we use tree mitigation funds for that as a separate we we we're the funds are derived through the tree mitigation fund and every every when we deplete the amount of money, we go back to the county administrator. We show him what we've done and then he replenishes the fund because we're spending it wisely

and we're stopping putting crepe myrtles in.

We don't we don't we don't um incentivize uh crepe myrtles. In fact, um we were talking with um our peers because we got together. We had public works, parks, facilities, focusing on how we could expense the county owned property tree mitigation money. And one of the initiatives that came out of public works was they're going to pull the crepe myrtles out of the rightway and install better trees.

Yes. I feel like we should be putting shade trees in these in these grants, not

I mean we need we need to put a can of back.

We agree.

We're going to heat up. Okay. Um,

and commissioner, if I may real quickly on the second half of the question regarding the expenditures not exceeding 50%, I think an example would be if we spent a million dollars on tree canopy replacement last year, we would limit landscaping and other a per um other supporting greenery, whether it's irrigation, mulch, or anything like that, to 50% of what was spent last year. So that would be capped at $500,000. And and the idea again is to focus the investment on canopy tree replacement as opposed to landscaping.

Is that is that um on trees purchased or trees purchased that planted?

It's a good question.

Yeah.

Purchased and planted. That's

I got to think which way is better for more trees in the ground.

I don't vote.

Yes. p purchased and planted would would keep the the dollars focused more on trees than

landscaping. Um I'm I'm willing to knock that 50% down a little bit if anyone else is

40% as a because I I wanted zero on that.

What is that now?

Well, I mean it's for I mean the commercial businesses are paying full hill. This is for the county. I'm county property.

Oh, county. We need to have the inmates doing this and have them start their own program.

Spend more money.

Well, I like I like

you're going to spend more money.

Spending more money on them anyway.

They don't have the equipment or the tools.

Two hands.

You're going to spend more money with a deputy watching them over.

Put them to work.

Well,

we have a pilot chairman.

Okay. So, it's it's purchased and planted then.

Okay. And what is the other one you were going to say? Public purpose. Where is where's that language? Cuz I'm not seeing

that is already approved under resolution number 25-291. It's section 25. So I just mentioned it, but it's not something that

was currently being proposed as a change.

Okay. I guess I missed that one.

Okay. Do you need

No, I want There's more questions coming. Okay.

So any commission?

No, I'm good on this section. Okay, Commissioner Oakley.

No.

Okay. All right. So, I want to get to back to more trees in the ground. How much do we have in the tree mitigation fund right now?

10 million.

Mr. Briox, look at that.

Something like 10 million.

A lot of money.

I don't think it's that much.

Mr. County administrator is pretty close in

I would say 10 million give or take a few. So give or take $10 million that we've taken from developers, we're sitting on that money instead of getting more trees in the ground.

Now I will tell you well I will tell you that um I think we need to look at find a ways to get these trees in faster. Now as I had mentioned part of the program that David works on as far as to take care of people that are coming into compliance up and down 19 wherever redevelopment's coming in, nonprofits coming in, we need to make it easier for them to be able to get the work done. So, I want to look at uh the changing of the reimbursement part of it. But if they get once the work is done, whether it be through the um person doing the work

or the person has just got it done because a contractor did ahead of time and just get them reimbursed. I'm okay with either way. Does anybody really care?

Okay, we just pay the bill.

Well, there's a way that we could be the bill payer on

for the trees. I I just some you know nonprofits don't necessarily have the money to put it out to get reimbured. I mean they have to add skills

in your small business.

Your small business. Yeah. So if we have the money why don't we just go ahead and put it

why go through that? Why make them go get a bank loan to put trees in?

I'd like to find a way.

Okay. So everyone's good with that change.

Repeat it, please. We're going to allow the person to either get paid after they've done the work

or to pay the contractor directly after he's done the work.

Non for profofits and commercial.

Non for profofits, commercial, whatever. Just to make it easy for It's great for cash flow.

You're saying on the You're saying on the grants?

Yeah. Well, and I'm going to tell the board that we have a precedent for that. In the commercial landscaping grant, we give 50% upfront so they can buy the materials. Then we reimburse the admin uh the installation

there. So if that if you want to be consistent that would give some upfront money or you can make it you know 207525 but

whatever works as long as the work's done I think the work should be done and then just and make a deal with the contractor once the work is done that's when he should get paid anyway

but we don't deal directly unless it's with with not for profofits we don't

if they finish if the person comes in finished with the work we go and see the trees were done then just cut the check and pay it direct to the company

well that yeah that's a re that's a reimbursement program with the commercial landscape Cape. We give 50% before so they can go out and buy the plantings.

Then we give the other 50% upon installation after the final inspection.

Once it's done, I'm good with that.

All right.

I have a question for you, David, or comment.

That's 50,

David. And can you tell us how much exactly is in the grant? I know you get 50%. So, what how much is the total that?

Sure. Um, for most pieces of property, we give up to $20,000. For larger tracks, from I believe from, I think, 7 acres to 10 acres, we give $50,000 to 40,000. And then if they upgrade the parking, we'll give them another 10 because we want to get our parking into conformance. And we require a 20% match. And generally, they're associated with uh capital improvements on property. So, it's easy to make the 20% match. That's the way we do it.

Okay. because Commissioner Mariano touched on something the other day. I was driving from Penllis and to Pasco. And matter of fact, I I uh texted Mike, but we need to incentivize redevelopment and, you know, let these people know that, you know what, this money is out there.

Oh, we went door todo on 19.

No, we we actively marketed. Um

that's a lot of money to offer a a business.

Yeah, we do a we we have a a kind of a portfolio of things we give small business now to redevelop 19. We do have um we also provided the board approved in January of 2022 a a substantial in decrease in the mobility impact fees for small businesses and uh there's other things that we do. I I think we have to do more and we're going to work on that for you, ma'am.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Yeah, I went I went with business.

So, as far as a cap goes, you said what was the number?

Uh well, it was 3500. The the cap that's been floating around is 10,000 with no with no credits against the Rupland Acres. But don't credit the preservation of these heritage trees against that cap. It's got to go in tandem.

Okay. But if but if I've got someone who's going to come in and we'll talking any business come in if they get most a lot of them are getting a bill between 40 50 60 70 80,000 you're capping if your caps at 20,000 they're not going to be able to get it done. So to me I think we should get more landscaping.

Yeah. Talking about parade. Y'all are talking two different

Right. Well, I'm I'm trying to get to where I wanted to get to, and that's to take care of the small businesses that are out there, even the nonprofits, but we took care of the nonprofit and and the reimbursement stuff. That's good and as well. But as far as there's a cap now for the small business guy that's in there, if he's got a $100,000 bill and we're going to give him 20,000, what does that really help?

Well, that's the landscaping grant. You may be able, you know, case by case, if it's a not for profofit, the 20,000 is not sufficient. Yeah.

They can apply to the board for additional tree mitigation funds,

but Why? Why? Why are we going through that step? If we want trees in the ground, I got 10 million in the bank. What's the easiest way to get the trees in the ground? Give them more money.

Just give

Why am I limited to 20 grand?

I mean, you're talking like an 8020 kind of split.

Well, I think there's some confusion. Oh, what you're saying is let's let's take the commercial landscape grant program and increase the amount of money for that. All right, we can come back to that. That's that's fine.

I want to come back to I want to do it right now while we're here. No, they would what they want to do is look, it's 50%, 70 or up to our discretion up to a certain percentage.

Yeah.

80%.

Up to

up to 80%. So we they'll pay 20, we pay 80.

Okay. So we'll pay So we'll pay 80%.

Um they'll pay the

and then they'll pay the 20. That'll be their local match, which is consistent with the current program.

Okay.

Uh last thing, palm trees.

Some people want them. I think they look good. I think we're in Florida. Sure, we should have more palm trees. Put them in groups of three is fine, but allow them to go out there as well to be part of this. And we'll take out the queen palms.

But look, look at Ashley furniture. That was not appropriate for the amount of asphalt they put in. So I think you have to be careful what

Well, the problem came with the crepe myrtles,

huh?

The crate myrtles were the problem because they're the ones that are dead. When you look at those pictures closely, you got sticks in the grounding in front of Newport Corners, you got sticks in the ground.

That's what you don't want to get rid of. And I I agree with that 100%. But if someone's going to bake three palms, the palms look good and just put other things around it.

I I

I hate to see us taking out so many oak trees and cutting a palm tree and it's

We're not taking them out. We're just adding them in where they're not there.

This is like just redevelopment stuff

up and down 19. I mean, part of the reason people didn't go do your tree mitigation fund and and doing all the re re redevelopment stuff because the old trees when they grow up, they block everything.

So, commissioner, you get a better view. Um, so resolution number 25-291 actually already includes reimbursement for the purchase of palm trees except for the queen palms. That is number section 3.2.

Right. When we look at 31,

when you're in a parking lot, you want to park underneath a palm tree or you want to park underneath an oak tree.

Which one's going to keep your car from burning up and gas fumes?

Well, the oak tree is going to mess your car up,

huh? The oak tree will mess your car up certain times.

Oh, I was trying to p park under the oak tree here.

Someone sometimes someone beats me too

sometimes. She can look either side there.

But anyway, I think they should have the opportunity to pick whichever tree they want. Palm trees were in Florida and especially along the coast, we should be looking at the palm trees already. The tanic acid that's in the oak tree is not good for the water. So perfect.

Um Mr. Chair, I Mr. So on the commercial landscape grant, we are going to an 80% county contribution based on the cost of the overall landscaping project with a 20% uh property owner match. Is that correct?

Perfect.

Okay. Thank you.

Do we have to vote on that or is that

I like that. Well, it's a separate program, but I think you can be included in this ordinance as a as a add-on, and we'll we'll make the alterations to the regulations.

And they have to put in irrigation, right?

Uh, yes, ma'am.

Yeah.

And they have to be maintained

for five years. Yeah.

They'll claw back and if they don't maintain it for 5 years and it's dead.

Okay. Mr. Garbella.

No, I was just I had updated numbers on the tree fund. So, approximately 12.7 in the fund. About 10 are in reserves. The rest is remains budgeted projects.

So I think

oh that's two million budgeted currently projects

and the beauty of the program is to get those trees in the ground to actually help the environment better. So what we're doing now is freeing that money up to get out there. Commissioner Oakley,

can we uh Mr. Could we have an audit of that ever so often so we keep up with the fact that it's moving and and that's being spent that way?

Yeah, I think once we get these changes here on the books now that the it's it's opened it up. I I would love to come back to the board maybe every 6 months and give you an idea of what's what's going on.

Yeah,

you have a ticker like population that going down.

Is Barrett here?

Oh, I'm sorry. We already apparently um the peed is to provide quarterly reports anyways on the expenditure of funds as noted items. We'll let you know that.

So, you would have been if you were driving to work on Little Road, you should have seen a whole bunch of new trees, but they got delayed, right, Barrett? Um, starting next week, this week. Next week, next week you're going to see a lot of trees planted Little Road. You can see all the irrigation um tubes sticking up out of the ground, but they're they're coming.

Okay,

Mr. I'm having a pre- audit question in my mind that we need to uh I'm a little concerned about money going out the door that isn't for product that's being delivered or retained or stored and without being committed to and in in advance. So there's probably something we need to think through just a little bit as to how we don't lose our investment so to speak. Yeah, I think uh that would be wise, Mr. Clerk, to come up with u accountability and transparency with with relation to those expenditures. And um Mr.

I would add on to that because we when we started the landscape grants, we did hear that there were some unscrupulous things going on where there were some folks billing for stuff that actually wasn't um being planted. And um so we do we do need to have checks and balances on

on it.

So let me go back to my first suggestion which was let's go get the work done and then pay the bill. Now the work's been done. You can verify the work's been done. You're stroking the check. It's already been there. If they got to maintain it for 5 years with this problem, we come back to the land owner. And you do the 50% uh upfront and the 50%.

Well, you might have to by by this protection as you're talking about, you have to skip that 50%. You just like pay him when the work's done period and then just

All right. So, pay full when the I'm just trying to get clarity. Pay when when the work's done 8020 and we we we maintain the five-year commitment to

Mr. Chairman, having been an executive director of a not for-p profofit, I can see serious problems with that because most don't have the funds to buy

which we said different for nonprofits. We said the nonprofits, they'll get the work done, we pay them direct, the contractor being done or instead of waiting to go

if a contractor will agree to nothing upfront. But again, buying the materials is one thing and having materials in hand and then paying for installation. Yeah, I think there's an issue with that.

We need to work through this just a bit because I totally understand not for profofits or organizations or even the trees are expensive and we're talking major capital outlay here uh for a very good purpose, but we got to make sure we figure out how we

I like the 50% up front and then the 50%

because then we it's

it's been working very well and we're just upping the amount of money we contribute. All right. So, let's let's stick with that with 8020 and then you guys can work out details as far as how to protect.

So, Mr. Engel, correct me if I'm wrong here, but that's not part of this resolution.

No, you're correct.

This is it for us. We're doing

No, Mr. Stein, you're correct. And it

I just conferred with Miss Blair of your office. And what we're going to do is we're going to come back with the commercial landscape grant program with a consent item at the next meeting or so. the next meeting.

All right.

Okay.

All right.

Well, I better go upstairs and start writing though.

Making that attorney nervous.

All right. So, with what we have in front of us,

any other thoughts, questions, or changes?

I'm fine with this section now.

With the one addition that was made. Well, that's actually was the previous one.

Yeah, that that was the ordinance.

All right. So, we need a motion.

Approval to chairman.

Yes. Commissioner, I do have a question.

So, wait. So, do we have a discussion about the cap or not?

Correct.

We have not.

We have not had that. That was to accept what he was talking about.

I thought we did 10,000 plus protect the heritage trees.

We're not done talking about that.

Okay. Well, I have to run to the next.

Well, let's stop the door.

So, I guess go to the next slide there, man.

Oh, no. This was just the recommendation slide.

So, the cap. So the cap on is what 10,000 per up acre.

Currently there's no cap in the resolution at all.

So though there has been some discussion about a $10,000 cap.

Per Upland acre.

Per Upan acre. Yes. The language that I sent to staff would be a $10,000 per upland developable acre plus $150 per inch for every tree classified as a heritage tree

over that would be over and above.

Yeah. So it would be $10,000 per up acre plus $150 per inch for every heritage tree.

So that's over and above the $10,000 per acre. Brad,

do you have a legal concern with it there being no cap?

If the board does not want to have a cap, that's a different conversation.

And that's and that's my point is that the way we're putting it forward. I want to make sure that the board understands that that that currently what is before them doesn't have a cap and they can stay on that trail or if they want to have a cap, this is the language we're providing. Yes, if the board does not want to the prior to board direction was to have no cap. If the board wants to maintain that direction, we can go with that direction.

So, I'm stuck. If if there's no cap, it's just a blanket fee. Wait till Commissioner Starky gets back. So, if there's no cap, you pay your your your blanket fee per acre and then there's no incentive to protect the heritage trees that we're trying to protect. That's what we're trying to get to here.

So, there are some provisions for protecting the heritage trees. So, the sheet that I provided, the walk- on edit, um that entire section is to incentivize applicants to protect trees in excess of the 20%. And there are some specific callouts. So, um there's $300 per inch for each heritage tree preserved, $150 per inch for trees 10 in in diameter and greater. Uh the ones are preserved within the required site perimeter landscape buffering and screening along arterial and collector roads. There's additional reduction in the additional tree canopy uh reduction for additional tree canopy preserved. So, if you preserve 5% more than that initial 20%, you get a 5% credit. And the tables there going up to greater than 15%, you get a 20% credit. And lastly, $150 per inch for trees 10 in and greater that are preserved within the required neighborhood park. And these can be combined for a maximum credit of 75% of the total monetary contribution due to the tree mitigation fund. You can also see here that these numbers are actually double the numbers that we had proposed for the actual tree mitigation fund contribution rates. So previously for any tree it would be $75 per inch. You can see here that the incentive is double that at 150. So that incentivizes persons to preserve more of those trees. And similarly for the heritage trees the fee would be $150 per inch. We have doubled that incentive to $300 per inch. I like it because it's kind of a carrot and a stick.

So, let me ask a question. What What's the current cap? Is it 2500? 3500?

Currently, there's no cap in the one that was provided within the agenda packet per the directions in January resolution.

So, right now it's $500 per unit

per acre.

Per unit?

No, per unit. That's on a house.

That's correct.

Okay.

It's we should have done. So,

so just to add clarity,

we go from 500 units to 10 grand. If we went to the 10 grand number,

that's a phenomenal

that's apples to oranges.

Is it

if you put four houses per acre, right, that would have been $2,000 versus 10 or unlimited.

Say that again.

You're doing units to acres is all I'm saying. If you developed,

so before was it by acre?

Before it was by unit by unit and now it's going by acre.

Correct. Okay, chair. For example, so Kokalakus in district 2, there were 687 live oaks that are going to be taken out. There's going to be 222 residential units at 500 bucks a piece. It comes out to $111,000. And so there'll be significantly less trees put back in and a significantly less rate than what that's just live oaks. That's not talking about uh the magnolia and all the other tree. I mean, you're talking almost 2500 trees total in this area. It's it's a completely lopsided deal. If if you're wanting to preserve trees,

can you estimate what the number would be to what they would have what they're going to pay now? What they're going to pay if this was in place right now

if it was a 10 grand cap. Oh, well, how many acres is it?

So, um, Patrick Der, development you when we kind of did this math and we went to developable acreage, um, we switched it from the per unit for single family. Commercial is a different ratio, but for single family, um, average density for our projects are roughly three dwelling units per acre basically. So, if that's $500 times three, you could more or less say that it was $1,500 was almost what the original version of this looked like. So, I think that's

$1,500 per acre versus $10,000.

Correct. That's assuming that our density, you would say it's three dwelling units per acre. That's right.

So, would an apartment now get hit harder?

I'm sorry.

Would an apartment get hurt harder than a single family home? Um, previously yes, but now it's just based off of land you're developing. Regardless if it's for single family homes, regardless if it's for multif family, regardless if it's for commercial, if you're developing that land, you're required to mitigate regardless of of the type of development

or did you or did you consider apartments commercial and run under a different

Apartments were based off of units. So if there's a 300 unit apartment complex, it would be 300. But that's assuming most apartment complexes because they're smaller are not even getting to the cap, the previous cap anyways because the sites were so small that it's generally better for them to pay $50 per inch, which was the previous code, than it was to even come close to the cap.

So right now, the apartments have no incentive to follow this at all.

To follow what? Right now,

if we put this new code in place, are they just still going to strip the land and build what they want to build?

Um, well, they're still going to, assuming that they there is a cap installed, they're still going to have to do tree mitigation, they're still going to have to account for the inches that they're moving. If they do hit a cap, if we do add a cap and they do hit that cap, they will still have to pay that fee.

What about no cap? The no cap scenario for them,

no cap, still the same. They're still going to have to do tree surveys. They're still going to have to tell us what trees they're taking out. They're still going to have to say which trees they're putting back. If there's still a deficit with no cap based off of those inches and those trees, whether they're live oak, magnolia, regular trees, they're going to be paying.

They're going to be paying if there's a deficit.

Patrick, can I ask a question?

Sure. If there were a $10,000 per acre cap, which types of projects are most likely to use that cap?

Good question.

I'm going to assume single family development projects, larger sprawling projects, if I had to guess.

Okay,

usually our larger projects, single family homes, sprawling are taking out the most trees. um it's our smaller commercial, our smaller multif family that are more compact are not taking out as many trees. So, um they're probably not going to be paying as much as those larger single family home communities that um have lesser densities. Think that answers your question? Sure. But the M

Patrick, but the the premise is we're not as M. So when these projects come in, they're taking out more than what's going back in the ground, which is why you pay for the fund and the county's figuring out how to spend 12 million bucks on limited space. That's that's what it is.

Sure.

So carrot is for them to keep more trees in the ground. Mhm.

So that's

what we're trying to do.

And I gave you an example

right here on Little Road of a Stormwater pond. There's a couple storm water ponds, maybe three that are surrounded by live oaks that were planted. We most of these developments with the storm water ponds, they don't put any trees on the edges when they could.

It's a great place to put shade trees.

Mr. Starking. Um, I will tell you I pictures when I went down to uh Fort Myers Beach down the main road along all this development that was there and all along the retention they had all these oak trees and guess where they were

in the pond torn up the sidewalk. Turn up turn just turned upside down because they got wet and they fell in. You don't want

turkey oats not live oaks.

Look at little road. Those those have been here since I moved here 34 years ago.

They're right across from Mitchellfield. They're fine. They I would say someone would have probably planted them a little too close together because you don't want to plant Iok too close together. But

you can plant them offside pond.

What about when the governor came back?

What about when the governor came out went to Bmont and we saw all those oaks that were down everywhere? Well,

because they got wet.

Okay, but how long have they stood there? I don't know one good storm probably been there a couple hundred years.

What I'm saying is if you put them near the ponds and the waters fill up and it goes those trees going to come down over

the the example a real time example is on Canon Ranch connected city on new 52 on the south side of the road where flood plane was built and you had grandfather oaks in the middle of these ponds. The hurricanes came through, the water fills up, those trees drowned, they fell over. If if humans hadn't have manipulated the land and put the water there, those trees would have continued on living like they have lived on that ranch for hundreds of years. That's the example that Commissioner Mariano's getting getting to uh putting those trees in areas that time is

these were replanted. The This is an area that was cleared um for the development. They did the storm water ponds that they planted oak trees on on the top, not in the pond, not on top of the ponds.

And um and they've survived many hurricanes. So, you know, we're not arborists. I would love to hear an arborist discuss this. Um but I'm going to show you that picture again. Just so you you remember what I'm talking about. Gina, uh, Gina, why don't you drop a a pin on Little Road?

That's 54 Little Road and um, let's see near near um, south of Cypress Lakes Boulevard. I'm not but I I'm just bring this up to say this is the way

picture you're talking

this is the way that we could get more trees into developments that should be I'm not saying uh

okay now yeah go down the Um, it's across. Uh, is it the other way? Sorry. Yeah, keep going. So, um, this is just a way we can get even more trees in. Right. You're coming up on them. Okay. Across the street there. There's a rare example when the scrap bars are looking half decent. Well, you're on the wrong side of the street. Um, your pin's on the wrong side of the street.

Yep.

Oh, yeah. I know what you're talking.

Yeah, those have been there for 30 the 34 years I've been here.

I would say they probably shouldn't have planted them so close.

That might have been a requirement back then. I I think someone did something nice. I don't know.

I don't know who developed that. Maybe John Hudson, but

the county did it.

The county did it. We put them around the pond.

Why? Well, good for us. We did something right. We could do that all over the county. I'm telling you.

It's wonderful. I mean, picture millions. Picture driving up the road and not having any trees there and driving up the road and what you see there now. It's lovely.

Yeah. 12 million bucks.

Well, like I said, we we planted them too close. Okay. So, where are we?

Gina, I just sent you two pictures.

I was researching. I wasn't on my phone. This is after the storm that we went down to see. So there's this is along the rightway near a sidewalk in where it's supposed to retain tension with you're just down light on little road. So there's one the next picture shows it even better. another one. So that that scenario was all the way up and down that roadway going in that just held on to the water and just what all those giant trees you all came down.

Doesn't look like they have any roots.

Looking at that,

I could I I got a whole video I can show you. But continually that was the type of thing that was out there. So too close to the ponds, they get wet. That's what's going to happen. Especially a good wind with water. You're done.

Okay. Where what what are we on?

Mr. Chairman, I believe you have an open motion that no one remembers at this point.

Well, still haven't made decision.

Oh, whether to cap or not. No cap.

And I want to make sure we're not making it easier on apartments to come in or incentivize them in any way. Uh compact, not compact them. I don't know if there's any way to divide that, but at the same time, if you got all these people coming in with developments coming in and all of a sudden you take no cap compared to a 10 grand cap, um that's I mean this is a big jump probably looks like sounds like it's about triple the effect financially. The other one is exponential depending the law. Um, I'll do staff recommendation based upon House Bill 399 that we're going to discuss earlier today. That's going to be how we start defending ourselves from that piece of legislation that's coming down the pike, which we'll bring up during commissioner time. You

want to go 10 grand then?

Staff recommendation.

Yeah, because I believe what are the other counties that don't have a cap? Give

me a second. was oh Hillsboro Penllis Aula

slide n can you unhide slide none

they looked at commissioner Jagger

when did they put theirs in place was it years ago or was it recent because I'm wondering and I talked to the county attorney if we push this law through what's going to be the effect based upon legislation that if we do harm an industry by putting a law in is is an issue. They want to discuss it.

It'll just prove the point that anything local government does, the legislature just won't beat us over the head.

They put this they puts us in place and we didn't do something that would be devastating to an industry no matter what it was. But if you would go

Yeah.

The only law that's currently in place is the law that requires the business impact estimate which staff has prepared for you. It does show that there's a at least potential and staff can summarize that analysis that on a heavily wooded site there is a potential that it could have a business impact. Now whether a particular property owner might file some claim you know arguing a taking orac claim we won't know until that claim is actually filed and we'd have to defend that claim when it's filed. I can't predict for you what might actually get filed, but on its face, I can't tell you that there's anything illegal about the what you're adopting.

The the piece of legislation that passed just requires us to do the business impact statement. Correct. The other piece of legislation which created a cause of action did not. Is that

correct? The only cause of action that might be alleged is is existing law like Harris Act

taking those types of claims that we'd have to see what was filed and and see what was alleged before we could advise you on that. But those would be fact specific claims that we'd have to evaluate.

So I'm I'm going to say that I think if we put this through there's going to be a lot of Bert Harris. There's going to be a lot of lawsuits coming. I mean, just you are making a dramatic step without even putting a cap in place. I think it's hard to

I kind of think we need the cap.

I mean, if you I just I think we're just going down a big road here.

I think you need to put a cap in place.

I'm not scared of it.

I mean, okay.

But Okay. Um, can I ask a question?

Good.

Patrick, didn't you do an analysis of what someone could be paying if we didn't have a cap? So, as part of the business impact estimate, we did include that for commercial development on an he a heavywooded parcel. Um, the parcel in question

um it was 19.94 acres. was actually a county site that we used um with an estimated 12,72 in of regulated trees and it worked out to be $229,425 based off of the proposed changes to the um contribution rates at $11,55.77 per acre.

And what would it have been the other way if we had developed it?

So that was not represented in the calculations here. How many definitely less is it? Do it.

This is 19.94.

So let's say 20 acres at someone do the math.

But again once per year $1,000

and this is per acre. So

I know I'm just saying tell me what it would have been in the old way on that lot figuring it's

a $1,500 difference from your cap to your new cap, right? 11,500 an acre, right? Versus a $10,000 cap. So it's $1,500 an acre. So 20 30 gram.

She's asking under the current.

Oh. Oh, under the current at 500 a unit. Let's I don't know.

Say they get 100 units on it.

You said the average is rest three three units an acre. How many acres is it?

So that'd be 60 units times 500. So 30 grand.

So we're going from 30 grand to 200. That's what I'm trying to on on our sample piece.

And that's from 2005 to now. So

right. So 30,000 to 229,000 and that's only on 19 acres. What are you going to do with someone's got 100 acres or thousand acres?

Well, that's where three the conversation on House Bill 399. But I view it like this. Look, we have impact fees. We just moved for fire. All these folks moving to Florida. My kids are sixth generation Pasco residents. All these folks that are moving here, flocking here after the closing and the 110 things that these folks demand out of local government when they come here, part of his trees, green green space everywhere. These folks are coming here and they're having an impact on our environment, on our communities, all the services we have to provide. The folks that the cost is going to be passed on to the consumers just that the cost of moving to paradise, moving to Florida. I think everybody who's been a Floridaian or been here for any amount of time has a little bit of environmentalist conservationist in them. I think that's just part of the Florida way and being a Floridaian which I'm very proud of. And so I welcome all these folks that are moving here and I'm excited they see opportunity here. But there's a cost to live here and they're doing it on the backs of us and our environment and our green spaces that people love so dearly. That's what part of makes what makes our state special and it's incumbent upon us. Pasco look a hurricane the hurricanes was mother nature given a great discount on trees with how many trees especially the tree canopy in East Pasville forever changed. that'll never come back in six generations. And that was a gift

unless we start planning.

That was a gift to the development community, I guess, by mother nature. But moving forward, we've lost so much across this county in the Bay Area that it's time to do something about it because we're a popular place to be. It's an impact. That's the impact fee of moving here to Florida, moving here to a county that my family's called home all across this county from the coast to the swamps to live here. And I think it's important that we we beef up the the the impact and and preserve our green space. And quite frankly, I know I keep referencing House Bill 399, but this is one of the ways that we're going to be able to defend ourselves from that bad piece of legislation. And so anyway, I'm for the the staff recommendation, staff uh recommendation on on this on this.

Mr. I am too and only because other counties already have it in place and people they're still building there.

So why wouldn't they build here?

So let me if I could who's done it and how long they have it in place?

Well, so for example, uh Bvard County uh doesn't have a cap on their uh fees, contributed fees, and they've had it in place since 2006.

We're kind of late. and they're a similar size county to pass the most recent one that's

well if you're you're looking at the the chart that's their last fee revision so we would assume that the maximum could have been put into place that year or it could have already been ex existing before

and David when did the legislature pass what they passed

last day session

which law are you talking about

the one where we have to investigate what the impact would be

oh business impact estimates I would say two or three years ago Yeah.

So after 2020.

So yeah,

I believe so. Yes.

All right. So all these things are before that.

But to be clear, that doesn't it's not a substantive change. Doesn't prevent you from adopting a law. It just requires you to disclose the impact of on businesses when you adopt the law.

Okay. Mr. Stucky. Um, one thing I want to be sure of is that we're not um getting clear cutting during a because of this of the number. So, I want to go back to what our rules are for um someone you you know Mr. Southwind or whatever his name was did took out those trees that he said he needed for his cattle and then six months later we had an Amazon warehouse. Um, what are our rules for cut clear cutting when you're egg and then coming in for

res? Yeah, we're not changing those rules.

I I want to make sure they're strong enough. So, I may need them stronger.

That was the ordinance that you

Yeah. So,

dealt with earlier.

Yeah. So

that was the old the old rules allowed a developer to basically claim the a exemption in one year and then the next year they could submit a development application and basically not have to mitigate for the trees they removed under the egg exemption.

Right? We changed that rule, I'd say probably five or six years ago.

We had that that

and said that to claim the egg exemption and not have to mitigate for the tree removal, you had to at least be under the egg exemption for five years. You had to be under a zoning and under that a exemption for at least 5 years or you had to be under the exemption for two years and wait three years before developing. So we so we attempted to close that loophole. Now, I've asked Patrick since we've done that whether anybody has attempted to abuse that system since we closed the loophole. And his answer was no.

Do you check

what

is he checking? And I want to say something.

Yes, he that's his job. So, I'm So,

you do check the tree canopy through whatever.

Yeah, we review past aerials um back to five years to see if it's changed.

Okay. But hang on one second. Something you said coming from an egg family still makes me a little nervous because I can be an egg family been an egg family Starky since I 1930s. So we can do whatever we want on our property and then I sell it to someone and I clear I clear it and then I sell it to a developer and he can start the next day.

We haven't saved anything. So, but but if you were bonafideed a egg for 5 years and you cleared it,

you weren't do you weren't clearing it for purposes of avoiding our ordinance.

How do you know that?

Well, you have to be thinking ahead.

Okay. But presume

I'm thinking of someone.

But the ordinance the ordinance presumes that you weren't because you did it for five years. I mean, I I can't I'm not sure. I can't I don't know for sure. Okay. But

I don't think it matters who owns it, that that if you're clear cutting, if you're clearing for a, which is covered, you know, we're we're a strong a county and a strong a state, they should be allowed to do it on their property, but they can't do it and then sell it within a certain amount of time to a developer, then we we've done that's what's going to happen. So, we got a long,

right? But but but

the commissioner what? No, he said

but

you could sell

but but the developer bought it in a cleared state.

Yeah.

When you cleared it

but I I promise you any egg families is going to sell it in a cleared state to a developer.

But you couldn't

I understand it.

He didn't say that. He didn't say that.

But but you're but why should the developer be penalized for something you did?

Look

why you had it in an a state.

You don't you don't understand what I'm saying? I think an example might be good, you know,

but but but regardless, the developer is still going to have to plant trees in accordance with our ordinance. It's not like the developer is going to get away with not having to plant trees. They're still going to have to comply with our code.

But if you have a heavily wooded site and you want to sell it, the developer who wants to buy it is going to say, "Clear it first and then I'll buy it."

Give an example.

That's what I'm saying.

Okay. Massav and little road you go down on the right hand side at that intersection there's a whole bunch of trees in there

they are pine trees most

that wanted to sell it clear them up if you if we put this through the way it is what happens is the people that aren't agg they're they're really going to be buried by this whether they do it or not right financially what you're doing though is now you're taking all the egg people and they're going to start looking you know what I can go clear my land yeah

flip my land and my land is worth so much more because I don't have that burden.

Yeah.

And now you taking a people out of business.

That's what's been going on now.

I know. But it's going to go more. You want

It's going to go more. So that's why I just want to protect it more. I'm I am happy to protect egg all day long. I'm not happy to take a and let it let them skirt around this tree protection ordinance. But that's what's going to happen if we don't if we go too too much or if we don't say if we say you cannot you cannot clear and then sell with right away. I mean we're going to have what the our worst nightmare. There's a lot of items,

right?

Yeah. But you look at the majority, you look at what's left.

I'm just saying it's all going to be clearcut.

Okay. So, your concern is that somebody could

You're talking timber versus

could clear it towards the end of their a exemption and then immediately sell it to the developer and then they would just develop it right after that. I don't know. I don't know how you protect that, but

we'd have to put it in a waiting period after

Yeah.

after the five years.

Five years.

I mean, we can do that if if that's if that's a concern. We can add a waiting period after the five years.

Yeah, that's what I was going to suggest that we impose a moratorum not to receive development applications for 5 years on the property if that's legal. I think five years maybe. I think the rules now

should run with the land, not the owner.

This is why I think we need a cat

and not a not a anything goes because

we're gonna we're going to do better. We're going to do what they're doing in other counties, but if we go too far, we're going to have

a mess on our hands. So, let me ask a board a question. I see we got a couple attorneys that represent at least three out there right now.

I see one former president of U DBBA. Do you want to get a little public input? See what they're thinking?

Yeah,

we've got plenty of time.

Yeah,

I don't know what that is exactly.

Let's do an open dialogue from the from anyone anyone from the private sector want to come forward and discuss this at all.

Can we have

If you don't, it's okay. I'm just giving you the opportunity. I saw Clark get up earlier so I'd rather have it open for everybody to hear.

Hey Clark, hobby hobby and hobby PA 109 North Brush Street, Tampa, Florida. Uh my only comment about this at all is on behalf of people who are in legit a I thought we had some language in the code as recently as a few years ago that already created the holding period that you're talking about. Maybe it accidentally got deleted or amended. But the one thing I am very si sensitive to is, and this affected uh Senator Simpson's property that he bought from one of my buddies in Dade City, is we can't uh affect the right of people with bonafide a uses to remove trees. I mean, they remove all of them under agricultural rules. And we had the site that uh one of the properties that Senator Simpson bought uh had pine trees on it because the grove had frozen out and he wanted to plant new orange trees and people flipped out when he clearcut the pine trees. So my only thing I would say to you is be cautious so that you don't adversely affect the rights of the remaining a people we have. We want them to remain in business and they're going to have to cut trees down to, you know, conduct agricultural activities. I I understand if there's a a year or 18 months if somebody comes in there and clears it and then there's a development permit filed, that would be, you know, like a bad faith thing, but if a guy comes in, you know, and some of my clients have to take oak trees out and stuff like that to plant trees sometime, we don't want to stop that. That's my only concern.

Clark, my thought is this. the the fear I get to hurting the egg people is not that you're actually going to hurt them. You create more advantage for them to go sell the property compared to I got this non-ag who can't take down trees. So I take these a people that are out there running a business. All of a sudden

they do the clear cut and all of a sudden you know what I'm better off just flipping this property to a developer because I've got to clear it up to go.

That's what the board that's what the board was worried about about 10 years ago. And again we created language that tried to

encapsulate. Let me let me finish my point.

Okay. Yes.

So, so with all that said that the A guys can go do that. We're not changing any of that. What it's going to happen though in my opinion is you now take these non-ag people with large tracks of land with lots of woods on them, etc. Now, they're not going to go sell their property because that the values diminish so much by all these fees that are in place for the trees. So, does that now promote more pressure for the ad guy to say, "You know what? I'm going to go I'll be good."

Well, that is that is a legitimate issue. And that's what Barbara and I were just talking about in the back. What's going to happen here? And there I think it's a fundamental misunderstanding with some some board members and people at large. The people who will be adversely affected by this will be the land owners to be clear. The developers, you guys can jack the rates up. It cost 20 grand an acre to to penalize somebody. They just go right to the land owner and they say, "We can't pay you 50 grand an acre anymore. You just don't get it." And believe me, they will be contacting you in the next year or so if you do it that way.

But those land those people are probably a and so they're going to take down those they're they're going to make their land.

Right. My my my only point of caution about this is since we adopted that one rule, I think your county attorney may be looking at some of our older stuff on the computer now. Since we adopted that rule about 10 years ago, it was maybe 10 12 years ago. I haven't heard of anybody doing that in anticipation of

Southwind did it.

Yeah.

So, I want to be clear, even the five-year rule requires that it be under a zoning and an agricultural classification. So,

but there's nothing that stops them from selling it one year later.

I understand that, but they'd have to then reszone it before they could develop it. So that the the time it's going to take them to reszone it

and maybe that's why it hasn't happened.

It's that's going to be three years.

I mean we could put a waiting period in. I'm not I'm not

either way it's three years whether there's

I'm not opposed to putting a waiting period in after they're done with that 5-year period. But I want to be clear that the 5-year period has to be while it's zoned egg. So they'd have to reszone it after that. Maybe that's why

I'm not sure why the language that that two or more consecutive years and has not submitted a development application

right

period for three years doesn't project

it's already in there

well because there's a prior one Jeff that says that's there's an or there's a prior one that says for five years

that it's been under a zoning for five years she's saying that one doesn't have a waiting period Yeah, that maybe we got that one out.

My point is that it has to be under a zoning for the five-year one. Has to be under a zoning

and an egg classification for five years

or

to get it reszoned. That's going to take you three years, probably two to three years, just to get it reszoned. I mean, we can put a waiting period after the five-year one, too. I'm not I'm not opposed to doing it. I'm just letting you know that nobody's going to be able to take that 5-year window and immediately develop because they'd have to convert it from a zoning.

I think what David's saying in a more simplified term is your code is more or less already achieving the same means. We have this hasn't been a big issue there. about 15 years ago this was happening a lot and we changed the code and tried to put these little tentacles in there and I haven't I mean I heard you mention one property owners saying I haven't heard anybody doing that since then. I mean the other people that that took pine trees out they were going to take the pines out anyway.

Well you know you have to we do have to remember too well like that property act in Massachusetts and little um Miss that that's silva culture. She

that's why she was going to take them out anyway.

She's a pine tree farmer. So,

but I want to be clear. If you want us to add a a waiting period after the 5 years, we can add it. I'm not

Well, what's the

Where'd Seth go?

Um,

I would just be cautious about your look back period is all I'm saying because

pardon me.

They're going to have to reconsider the ordinance to do that. However,

yes, we'd have to reconsider the ordinance.

We went back and started talking about what the ordinance provisions were that you've already adopted.

Barbara may I think Barbara may have something to say. Hello. I had to stand up. I was falling asleep. Barbara Will height 6327 Grand Boulevard. You know, my perspective is you did something when you just passed your ordinance, which was allow this to be done by resolution. So, you can see what bad things people do in the next couple months. Tell them to come back and pass a cap, make an incremental step, see what bad things people come up with, and you can fix it. This isn't the end of this discussion because it's done by resolution. you're very nimble. You can address it very quickly. Staff sees something going on, they're like, "Oo, let's change that cap." Multif family maybe is an issue. They start seeing applications come in, they can change that cap. So, I just because you could go on here for quite a while.

So, you're for the cap.

I I do think you should make an inch mail step. I think you should put a cap in place. You can change it

very very very quickly because it can be done by resolution per the ordinance you just adopted. That's my recommendation. Thanks.

We need to move on. We got a lot to do.

All right. So, we have a motion.

Well, I I would make a motion.

We should wait for Seth. Seth's still here.

Yeah.

All right.

Anyone else want to

Someone go check on Seth.

I think you have on his way to the men's room.

Well, I don't have to go inside or anything.

Also, should we want to say something?

No, I'm just saying that I'm waiting to see what happens here. I mean, as it relates to the motion that's pending. And should we hear from Ralph to see about

what is House Bill 399?

I don't know what that is,

Ralph. Yeah,

I would love to.

I mean, is that something we need to know before we vote on this? I don't

We can have a discussion about 399, but I think it could be a separate conversation in my opinion.

Are we preempted again? We are preempted on some issues, but I don't

I said I was going to get I was going to put Florida legislature in front of

I don't think it's it's not directly related to trees or tree mitigation if that's the question.

Can you give us a little bit about the bill?

Sure. The the primary preeemptions relate to compatibility and um mobile homes in single family neighborhoods.

Oh yeah. Yeah. There he is.

You speak and he returns.

I can't see him. He's too.

There's Ralph.

Good afternoon. Ralph Lair, interal affairs officer. So, you wanted to know information regarding House Bill.

All right. Good. So, I'm just going to touch on on a few items that are in the bill and and I know David was talking and and uh has looked at it. Um, it updates local uh government land development regulations to include specific compatibility consideration for certain residential applications, limiting grounds for denial and requiring detailed jurisdiction or justification. It bars denial building permits for certified residential manufactured buildings on designated lots subject to existing requirements and tax provisions. requires that off-site constructed residential dwellings be allowed in any zoning permitting single family homes and bars local regulations that treat them more restrictively than sight built dwellings.

So that's for a manufactured home,

correct?

Well, to be clear now, it appears it applies to mobile homes now, too.

Yes.

Is that now is that now passed?

Uh it's already passed and it's uh already on the governor's uh desk. Okay. uh it was signed and sent to him on the 18th. He has till uh April 2nd to sign the bill or let it pass.

A mobile home can go in say Beexley or Atoria or

is this to be clear it wouldn't supersede private deed restrictions.

Correct.

But if it's an area like Moon Lake like the one we just heard where it doesn't have private deed restrictions,

it would supersede our local zoning. And again the what the way they looked at it is they they they did this uh particular bill to to have more affordable housing products in uh in the state. That's how they see this. All right. Why don't we move to item P35 and we'll come back to this.

Okay.

All right.

Keep moving. P3 P35. We have proof of publication of the hearing of this matter in the February 25th, 2026 edition of the Tampa Bay Times. Hey, good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Connor Donovan, acting chief of staff. Before you today is item P35, an ordinance amending chapter 2, article 5, division 3, section 2-225 of the Pasco County Code of Ordinances relating to the commission on the status of women. Providing for inclusion in the Pasco County Code of Ordinances, severability, conflicts, and an effective date. This comes to you with a recommendation of waving introduction and accepting public comment. then adopt the proposed ordinance amending the Pasco County Code of Ordinances by roll call vote and authorize the chairman to execute this amendment. And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Move to approve.

Public hearing.

Oh,

just a little discussion. So, we currently been funding them for 5,000 a year. They want to go to 7,500 a year.

Yeah.

All right. So, I didn't see the work plan. I had to go asked for the work plan as far as what they're what they're doing with the money, but um I think it's discussion should be have what they're doing. Um

this goes to this pretty much goes to their big big annual uh event that

Yeah, they have an annual event that cost some money. They haven't been able to

Okay, so does so just pretend Blaze is in the room.

Do you think we should have this group trying to raise money on their own to fund these things rather than us doing it? They they I think they are, but they're brand new. So,

how long they've been in play?

But they Well, having an event is brand new.

This is This is going to be their second or third lunch. Which one?

Yeah,

it'll be their third.

Yeah,

it's their third annual lunchon.

Started out, they didn't have very many of They didn't have a large event. They have a small event, but

I actually afforded to I know you both sponsor it. I sponsor one.

Yeah. So in in doing so, I mean, do I want to take taxpayer money to pay for lunchon or should I look for those out there to go contribute to it?

Well, it's about the status of women and and in Pasco, we all care about the status of women and how people look at them and and what they do for the county and what they do in

a lot more county. I can tell you that they give them Yeah.

a lot more.

I I just think we should be going private sector. I mean, I'll I'll support this one, but I think we should put a notion out there that all those people that want to support the women, let them step up and go start sponsoring these things, too.

I I think this one's very much in line to to do what they need to do.

Yeah,

I think Blaze Noly will be thinking differently, but

All right. Any further discussion on the item? It's time for public comment. Anyone here in the public want to comment on item P35? sitting here.

And you had a motion. I see someone coming forward.

Don't worry, we have all

Oh, okay. There's one.

Didn't plan on it, but I will. Christy Zimmer, um, address of record, as a woman business owner in this county, this commission on women, I've been following it, does nothing for all of us women in this community. I don't want my taxpayers going to paying for their lunchon. What What's the feedback for the community and the women business owners? There's been no outreach.

Did you give them um any your information for womenowned business?

Yes. No, there's nothing. So, if it's going to pay for their lunchons, I'm not okay with my tax dollars doing that. If it's going to build up women in business, yes. But it's not my thoughts.

Mr. Mr. Bell,

I I just want to add that they are prohibited from spending that money on food.

Oh, sorry. Oh,

okay. So, it's not going to the food,

right? Or is it good? And and so with that said, I think I think you should get that lady that coached today and she should be one of your speakers.

She should be one of your speakers that I think that would

get a lot of people excited.

Well, the speaker last year was the one that was at M Skills.

Yeah. that you you saw that with the um foster kids is fantastic. But

but as much as it's it's I mean I appreciate what they're doing. I I will tell you the conversation I think it was we had last year or the year before they talked about trying to work on ladies as far as child care.

Maternity leave. Well, I haven't seen a thing come back to us.

Well, you're not.

Bring it to us. We're we're the ones paying for it.

Get Let them do a presentation. Here's what we're going to go do. Here's what we're present. Maybe before we do this, we need to have them bring us a presentation telling us why they need it and how they did.

Yeah. Just for additional context, they did come to this board and present their action plan this past summer. And at that meeting, you guys gave the direction via unanimous vote to say yes, let's bump you from 5,000 to 7500, right?

Uh this is just effectuating that in the actual ordinance. So that direction had been given. They do present their work plan to you on an annual basis. This is just putting that into effect.

Why wasn't that already in place?

But I am gonna follow up on what Christie said. Make sure because one of one of our big goals there is to um really um beef up Sorry guys. Um and support womenowned businesses. So I will make sure that getting out there.

So you have a motion and I have a second.

Yeah.

All in favor say I.

I. I.

It's an ordinance.

Mr. Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Wake. Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner.

District five, Chairman Mariana.

Hi.

And once again, we have a waiting list because we don't have a space big enough.

Where are you going?

We got

Where you at?

They're at uh I think they're at PHS. Yeah. I'm going to try that new place on the Sun Coast if he's done.

Look at Spartan. You get Wy grass.

Uh

Saddle Brook.

Good. Good. No, that's too expensive. We can't afford that.

It may help you.

Okay. All right.

All right. We're going to go back to we were on P34. We don't need

back to P34. Pleasure of the board.

Uh, you mean R30?

I'm sorry. R30. Sorry.

So, is staff recommending the 10,000 cap or no cap? So, previously we were directed to do no cap back in January. Okay.

And then we got comments from stakeholders that 10,000 would be more appropriate. So, it's at the board's discretion if 10,000 is the desired amount, but we can make that

12,000. 10,000, but I I think we need to count

10,000. I like

I do have a question. Um, Commissioner Weightman mentioned uh heritage trees and basically having that be counted separately. Um, would that 10,000 include that or would it just be a flat 10,000 per upland developable acre?

The heritage looks like there's three votes per cap.

Yeah, but what do we want to think about the heritage?

They need to be over and above because the mission here is to save the

That's what I thought that was.

Yes, that's what the mission is.

Okay.

Save the heritage trees. And we have a definition for heritage trees. They are

We do.

So the motion is with the cap of 10en with the heritage trees outside of it.

Yeah. Okay.

So I got a motion. We have a second roll call vote.

This one can be straight up. It's not

straight up. Sorry.

Are we clear?

All in favor?

Clear on that?

I

Okay.

Any opposed?

I So four to one. What was the name? Seth wanted to know.

I said I said I reluctant reluctantly.

Were you slow on your 50?

I was reluctant.

50 vote.

But

good thing

I'm grateful. I'm grateful that we moving

forward

forward in the right direction.

Um did we did we do any escalator? Wait, guys.

Didn't we want to tie this so that we don't that there's a every so often it increases so we don't

Let's move on.

I see how it works.

Um, chair, if I may, real quick though, um, it's David Allen. Um, since this is resolution, if there is a desire to increase fees, we can do that relatively quickly with resolutions.

Okay. And we included that language in section 802 as well that we would review it on a three-year basis. Not necessarily change it every three years, but that we could look at it on a periodic basis.

All right. Item P36.

Item P36. We have proof of publication in the March 11th Tampa Bay Times.

Good evening board. My name is Carrie Roberts, purchasing director for the county. Today we have a ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending various sections of chapter 2, article 4, division 2 of the Pasco County Code of Ordinances relating to purchasing provided for changes and additions to definitions of terms. Providing for changes in purchasing limits, including during emergencies and for modifications. Adding purchasing process for declared emergencies. Delegation of authority for contract renewals. Authorizing solicitations for multiple award task order contracts and requests for qualified quotes. Specifying notice for invitations for negotiation. Providing for changes to local preference. Creating exemptions for excluded infrastructure projects, food and venue rentals. Providing for changes to unauthorized purchases. providing for conflicts of interest in department regarding county employees involvement in solicitations and awards and providing changes to bid protest procedures and the amount of protest bond and providing for severability providing for inclusion in the code and providing for an effective date. We are asking the board to approve this recommendation today. We have a presentation if you would like to see it and I'm open for any questions you may have.

Anyone need a presentation?

Okay. Uh there's a public item uh public

public hearing.

Public hearing. Would anyone here like to speak to item P36? Anyone online?

No, sir.

Seeing no one, we'll close public comment. Back to the board.

Move to approve.

Second.

District one, Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two, Commissioner W.

Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

I.

District four, Commissioner Jerger

is absent at the moment. Uh, District Five, Chairman Mariano.

Hi.

Motion passes. Four zero. Now we go to public hearings uh with the county attorney review the procedures for the resoning.

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

Now, at this time, anyone who anticipates giving testimony in any of the reasonzoning matters, please stand. Again, even if you're not sure, but you think you might be, if you please stand, raise your right hand. Do you and each of you swear or affirm the testimony you will give in these matters is the truth. So, I help you God.

When you come forward, if you would please announce your name and address at the record and confirm that you were sworn. Thank you.

Thank you. Today, we have two public hearing items in the agenda that are contingences. We'll start with P37.

P37, we do not have proof of publication. This was previously said on the agenda for an item that was continued, but we still do not have approve of publication for hearing.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Item P37 is PD26 CU09. This is the conditional use request the name of Bear Creek Group Home Elevated Youth Services, which was a conditional use for residential treatment and care facility in an R4 high density residential district. Uh, this is coming to you with the recommendation to continue to a date uncertain. Move it to continue.

A motion to approve. Have a second.

Second.

Second to continue for a long, long time.

And I haven't met with staff on this yet, and I don't know why, but anyway. All right. All in favor say I.

I.

Item P38.

P30.

P38. We have uh proof of publication of the hearing of this matter in the February 4th edition of the Tampa Bay Times supplemented by certifi certification of mailings and site postings.

Uh this item is PD 267857. This is a zoning amendment in the name of Kalante Resorts MPUD by LOL Properties Incorporated. It's a reszoning request from a master plan unit development to a master plan unit development uh to allow for the development of 96 condominium units. This is coming to you with a request to continue the item to the April 21, 2026 board of county commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. or soon thereafters may be heard in Newport Richie.

So move second.

All in favor say I.

Any opposed?

Okay. 5.

Um okay. Now we have the consent agenda. Item P39.

P39. Proof of publication Tampa Bay Times February 4th, 2026. supplemented by a certification of mailings and site postings.

Item P39 is PD 267886. This is a zoning amendment in the name of Tina Marie and Steven Frell Frell project. It's a change in zoning from an AC agricultural district to an AR agricultural residential district in northwest Pasco County on the west side of Nottingham Trail approximately 1,660 ft north of the intersection of Robin Hood Road and Nottingham Trail containing approximately 10 acres. This comes with a recommendation to approve the zoning amendment.

Okay. Anyone here to speak in opposition to this item?

Is that close to our place on Lingham?

Not far.

All right. Seeing no objections, we'll keep it leave it on consent. Item P40.

P40. I approve the publication February 4th, 2026 edition, Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site postings for the February 17th, 2026 board of county commissioners meeting where it was continued to today.

Okay. Is anyone here to speak in opposition to item P40?

This is where you might addition.

Yes. Actually, let's pull this off consent. We do a quick addition later. Uh item P41.

P41. We approve of publication February 4th, 2026 edition, Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by certification of mailings and site postings.

Okay. Anyone here to speak in opposition to P41? Seeing none, we'll leave it on consent. Item P42,

group of publication, Tampa Bay Times, February 4th, 2026, supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Anyone here to speak in opposition to P42? I'm assuming there's no one online as well.

No, sir.

Okay. All right. So, that is the consent agenda. We'll leave that on consent as well. Have a motion.

Approval of all consent items.

Second.

All in favor exception of 40.

With the exception of P40.

With the exception of 40. Okay.

All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed?

Okay. Motion carries. All right. Item P40. There was a change. Uh, I know we had a connection going to the east and Commissioner Stark, you wanted to see there was going to be a a connection to the west.

Yes.

The applicant come forward.

I'm ready.

Barbara will high 6327 Grand Boulevard. My laptop has died. This is all I got here. I don't see very well anymore. So, um, we we kind of worked on this while we had a little bit of time. Um, Commissioner Starky has asked for a sidewalk. We have a culde-sac. If you did have the binding concept plan, if you saw that towards the north, there's a culde-sac. There'll be a um sidewalk around that culde-sac. So, we're going to take a sidewalk from there over to the west property boundary, which is the county's Elamp property. In order to do that, this is what we would put on the record. Applicant agrees to update the binding concept plan to include a 5-ft sidewalk from the culde-sac on the north end of the property to the west property boundary. Apple agrees to a new condition of approval. The sidewalk from the culde-sac on the north end of the property to the west property boundary depicted on the binding concept plan shall be constructed prior to the final building inspection for the first certificate of occupancy. And I got that approved by David on the first right. So I'm first time I wrote it. So that's pretty good. But he did want to make sure that staff also acknowledged that they'll need to update their their memo agenda memo to you and update their variation analysis. So if you were wanted to do a motion include those things, I think you could move this along.

Okay.

So move

second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor say I.

I.

Any opposed?

Mr. Chairman.

Just for the record, there was a late exparte that was received for this MPD. It's been submitted into the record.

Okay. Thank you. All right. Two committee reports. Commissioner Oakley.

Well, had a good week last week. celebrate my anniversary.

Happy anniversary.

I'm sure y'all had a good time back here while I was on cruise. Um, I'm here today to tell you all that we've lost a good friend in Scott Grant. He passed away last Wednesday. Um, Scott lived in Pasco County for a long, long time. first started off in uh Zephry Hills Police Department, then moved from there after after a few years with the Zephri Hills Police Department on to um um the Pasco County Sheriff's Office and then served there for till his end of his service for law enforcement for 34 he served 34 years total. Um, I had him in I think it was during my first term I had him come and meet with us in Dade City to historic courthouse. He and his wife.

Um, Scott really was u he was a person that I mean you you hadn't seen him in months, you'd see him one day and it was like you just saw him yesterday. I mean, he's that type of person that very good, believed in doing things for others and and really working hard for for the people of Pasco County.

And I certainly appreciate his friendship and and he and his wife after he retired from the police department or sheriff's department, he um decided to I guess he had a face and a beard for being Santa Claus. So, he became Santa Claus. He felt that every child needed to receive a u joy and laughter and fun through seeing Santa Claus during merry seasons. He he really u went out this was he and his wife his wife Jackie joined him as as Ms. Claus. Yeah. and they I mean they just very beautiful people and what they did around and brought a lot of joy to Pasco County citizens. Um they stayed very very busy in this role. But if you will join me in just a u uh a moment of silence for them and I will end it when it's time. Amen. Okay. And there's a copy here and I'm going to put it on my uh Facebook page also. His services will be held this weekend, I think on the 28th and um if anyone's interested. But I'm going also put it on my uh Facebook page so people that'll see it that like me might have been out of town or something didn't realize and I didn't realize he had the issues he had but he passed with the a hard fight with cancer. So

okay that's all I have commission. Well start off with two happy anniversaries to the Oakleys and to the Starkies. Happy anniversary. Um, last week we had a want to thank school board and uh, Superintendent John Le and Megan Harding and um, the principles and the teams at uh, Lyn Angeline Academy, Mary G Elementary and Shady Hills Elementary. Enjoyed touring those schools and meeting the staff there and uh, got a firsthand look of of just the needs in the areas of sidewalks and turning lanes. very nice turning lanes uh going in off of Shady Hills to help relieve some of the traffic challenges that we're having there. So, very much appreciate the school district for inviting me to tag along for some tours for the day and the balance of my time. I just think it's important to be a broken record again and and bring up 399. Did you talk about 399 while I was out a little bit?

We briefly talked about not much. Well, it's important. Um there's some some strong stipulations in there. Any property under 100 acres, which is the vast majority of the properties I think that we'll see in our county. And um curious to see what we can do to uh make sure that projects that come in um are good projects for our county and how to protect the due process rights of the neighboring properties. since the language infers that even if the project's not compatible with the neighboring property, those neighbors don't have an opportunity to say anything.

That's crazy.

And so due process has seemingly been taken away from those neighboring residents. So, Mr. Go see if if there's any other details you'd like to to share on that or if you haven't gone through your review of the whole bill. Um uh that's important because it's going to shape how we make uh decisions on projects into the future. I believe

well I mean it definitely requires more specific standards when it comes to compatibility. Um, you know, arguably some of some of these standards you've already started because, for example, some of the stuff you've done with PM26 and 40 foot lots would arguably comply with um with this bill. But then there are some standards that you probably would need to add to your comp plan and land development code dealing with compatibility. And if you're going to deny a project based on compatibility, you certainly have to have more objective standards under this bill. Um, one of the biggest preeemptions is one that we discussed while you were out, Commissioner, is that you now have to allow mobile homes in single family zoning districts. Um, previously that preeemption only applied to modular homes and now it applies to mobile homes. So that's a new preeemption. Um, but in terms of in terms of your normal review of MPDs and resonings, I would say probably the compatibility requirements are the biggest change in the law.

Do you want to expound on? So is it is it confirmed that um, uh, neighboring property owners, they don't have the opportunity to speak against the project? No, I there's nothing in there that says that they don't have an opportunity to speak against the project. It's it's more that if you're going to deny the project based on compatibility, it has to be based on objective standards. Objective compatibility standards. So you can't and presumably if the residents are going to object they would have to be citing your objective compatibility standards when they when they go to object to the project. So it requires more objectivity when you deny a project based on compatibility.

It's going to be tough. Yeah. The language that says references to community character or neighborhood feel are not sufficient in of themselves to support the denial of an application on compatibility grounds gets after the when the neighborhood comes in and says it's not consistent with our our neighborhood. I mean, that's sort of where in the past you've been able to say that's what compatibility really means.

That's too far.

Yeah.

That's that's the ultimate overreach right there.

And it also requires that you have to offer the developer a chance to mitigate for the incompatibility,

a developer or a builder because that's not going to be a developer. the developer/builder, whoever the applicant is, the we have to offer the applicant an opportunity to mitigate for the incompatibility.

Nothing more here,

Mr. Stark. Um, so I handed you well first I I attended the parks workshop which I thought was excellent and I just want to say how happy everyone is that we we did that. I No, no one's I don't know who's happier, me or Keith. Probably Keith, but I'm very happy too. Um um this is uh what um what I talked about yesterday or last at the parks meeting. And Commissioner Oakley, when you get a chance, I'd love for you to read this and I'd love for us to put on the schedule to um talk about our neighborhood parks because that is another one that um really needs updating. And when our county attorney said, "Oh, this is what everyone else has been doing. You just don't do it here in Pasco," I was agast. But again,

I did have I did have a sit down meeting with him before I went on my trip.

Well, what what's going on here is somewhat of what I think we should be doing here. And I I won't go into it now because it's a long time, but okay.

Have someone read that to you because I know it's small print.

Marie's here. If you'll just send it to us. So, um I I and we definitely just like we did the tree ordinance, we need to talk about our neighborhood parks. Um and then I uh I wasn't going to pull Barbara's how many hundreds of town homes project um because he's already at the finish line. But I just want to say

it was 100.

No, it was 200 or 300. 200. No, it ultimately was 100. I was the wrong number in

Oh, you gave me the wrong number. Okay. Well, I feel a little better.

Oh, sorry to bring that up.

Um, but still, it's a I think when you see some of these town home neighborhoods, and which David Angel is telling me we're saturated with town homes, and he thinks a bunch of them are going to be built to rent town homes now because there's no one to buy those town homes. Um,

yeah.

I just don't think we're doing a good job on these town home neighborhoods, especially when they're a neighborhood of only town homes.

Yeah.

Uh, I don't think it's going to be a pretty look for us, especially all front loaded. All it's going to be is a street of driveways and doors with no neighborhood community feel. I have already said, I'm going to say it here again. I will not vote for front-loaded a only front hole loaded town home project on 54. I'm done with it. Y'all want to sacrifice 52 and Wesley Chapel and VP and all that? I don't think you should. I think you guys should get in a car and drive through some of these neighborhoods and see if you like that look for our county because that's pretty much all we're approving right now. is front-loaded six to a unit town homes. We already said no more eights or or what what is it that we said with eights and that Patrick that's kind of why and I asked Terry to come back but I guess he didn't see it. What is what are we letting eight eight to uh

um that's PM26 uh included in some of the I think some of the negotiations for your MPUDS. Um I think we allow them. I think

my recollection is the band's on eight. You don't allow eight units.

Yeah, I I'm not a fan of eight. I'm barely a fan of six.

Can I say something?

So, I talked to um

who was I talking to? It's been such a long day. Was it uh

Dean? I sent you a picture.

It was Terry Pedos. And I asked him if he could make an interactive map where we rolled over it and see what it's entitled for. Because when I was recently looking at a project, it was like apartments, apartments, apartments, apartments. So, but when we look at it, we have no idea what it is. So, that would be in your case with the town homes. We I asked him, he's like, "Okay, town homes here. Apartments, apartments, single family."

We don't we just see it. We see it in little snapshots,

but that would help the whole picture.

That's what I'm saying. So, that helped by seeing the entire picture. But like that project, I just I I think this neighborhood park, if we redid the neighborhood parks, it could make a difference in the feel of those kind of neighborhoods. Um, but I'm going to tell you, I I'm I'm embarrassed for what that's going to look like when we're done. And I will also say this that um I've been finding out as I've been traveling around I I don't know so much in Florida, but I know where my son lives in Connecticut and where I'm just buying a place out in Utah, no fast food drive-throughs. They don't allow them. They want to have they they do at certain intersections of interstates, you know, where you're going to pull off, you're going to get some gas if you're traveling, but they don't line their roads with with fast food. They want you to There's mom and pop restaurants all over the place in these places. Um places with character, not Burger King, McDonald's, and and all that stuff. So, if you look at our We only have two roads and we're just lining them the whole way down with drive-thru fast food. I I I think I don't I just don't like our development pattern.

Well, let me ask you a question. What do you think about all these apartments? I think there's a place for apartments when they're I think there's a place for density when they're near near a town center um near near something that needs uh people to support the businesses. Um, it's funny. We we um went to lunch in Newport Richie, downtown Newport Richie today and um my brother-in-law's got his second apartment building going up the central. The the rest of it's going up and I I know those restaurants in Newport Richie are struggling because they don't have density around there. And so I know they're very excited to see more people moving in downtown that will utilize those restaurants. They're having a hard time. Um, and so I I go there a lot to try and support them. So I think apartments are okay if they're situated in the right place, but just to put apartments willy-nilly all over the place now.

Well, do you think we have enough in Trinity and Worley Chapel?

It it depends on where they are.

You don't think we have enough either place?

Well, are you saying we shouldn't ever allow any?

Right now we're over supply.

Oh, yeah.

Dramatically. I mean, town homes were getting there now, but apartments were over supplied.

Yeah. So, you don't see any new ones going up. There's no financing.

No. And I We have a site in So, you're done with them in Starky Ranch.

No, I'm not done with them. I think there's places where they may be appropriate. I'd love to see some on 19. I keep hoping for someone to come in on that that vacant property uh right on our county border. Um it'd be a great spot for for a park. It's already zoned. I just

D David must come.

Yeah, I think he was going to say you talk about the planning meth.

I I just be careful because the DR money the DR money is all the $30 million set aside is just going to be for sprawling multif family discounted subsidized multif family. That's that's who's going to want those funds and that's what is going to be built. That's why I'm concerned with the housing aspect of the DR funds. It's it has a real potential to have just as much generational harm as probably more so than good.

I'm very hesitant.

Let me give you one second, David. Let me tell you something that that my staff is working on to put together with some of that CBGDR money. Kathy may know this a little bit, David, but Marcy was the one who really and you know, I sit on the Ahack that uh advisory affordable housing

advisory committee,

you know, because every county has to have a commissioner that sits on that. One day I'm going to hand that over to the staff. I should put you on.

You have me as your quite often.

Yeah. So, um, we are putting together a meeting with the TBVBA, uh, builders and developers to offer them the opportunity to sell a lot or house in their neighborhoods to put into the affordable housing pool. And so, uh, what happens is is, uh, so back in the DRRI days, you're too young, but maybe Commissioner Oakley will remember this. And you remember We used to exact them.

Yeah. 10% of your propert 10% of your development had to be affordable housing. And then we we got rid of DRIs and a lot of counties put that back in to their their codes, but Pasco, it's called inclusionary zoning, right? Inclusionary zoning. So, I've talked to a bunch of the builders and they're willing to they're willing to take a look at this program. So, let's say uh LAR is building a 100 homes. They would offer up some of their homes. We buy down the cost and those homes stay in a lowinccome pool that um that is regulated by the title company and the property appraiser. We don't have to have anything to do with it. When they go to sell, there's restrictions on it. So, you would it doesn't look any different than any h other house in the community. Um and the builder and developer doesn't have to really do anything. just that we're we're using money like the CDBGR money to help a low-inccome family get into a neighborhood that they otherwise couldn't, which is healthy for everybody. So, I'm hoping that can really take off.

Hi, David Engel, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. I just wanted to let the board know that about two and a half weeks ago, I sent out a proposed um bullet list of apartment performance standards and we on your calendar to have 101 ones and it's our intention to bring it forward. Uh all of the criteria set forth is not arbitrary. It's uh objective criteria and we have a map as to where these apartments could be situated in the county against just building helter skelter. We also have a density bonus incentive built in for affordable housing without advorum waiverss. So, uh, stay tuned. I'll be in front of everybody by by the end of April. Thank you.

So, Mr. Ster, you want to talk about your parking a little bit more?

My what?

This.

Okay. If you if you want to go into it, I

I think I think it's a great topic. Yeah.

So, this is the requirements in the town that I just uh got a town home in. But my town home is two to a building, one only one other one. So it it's kind it's nice because they look like they're big houses rather than a whole row, you know, and you've got a lot more a lot more open space to it.

Uh somewhere. Yeah. Okay. Um so public public SCA space will be required in each subdivision based on the following formula which has been prepared providing 3 acres of public space per 100 residential lots or units and 2 acres per 100 commercial lots. Subdivisions with less than 100 residential or commercial units shall provide dedicated public space on a pro rata basis. When the percentages from the above formula would create less than 2 acres, the planning commission may require that the public space be located at a suitable place on the edge of the subdivision so that additional land may be added at such time as the adjacent land is subdivided. So you get a big enough piece if it's on the edge that you add the other guy's edge and you get something, you know, very cool that the public can use. You you'll see this in you're going to see public space like this in um the planning commission may refer such proposed reservations um to the town to the town engineer or town planner for recommendation. Land reserved for recreation purposes shall be of a character and location suitable for use as a playground, playfield, or other recreation purposes and shall be relatively level and dry unless the town council approves a variation to the following standards on a showing of good cause. Subdivisions will include the following public space amenities or equivalent. A subdivision between two to 20 lots shall include amenities such as a small park with a community garden or a plaza with a covered seating area. Subdivisions between 21 and 50 lots provide amenities such as a park with play equipment or a dog walking park or large community garden space with designated plots for residents. Subdivisions between 51 and 75 provide enemy an amenities such as a park with the equivalent of two tennis courts and a gathering area. Subdivisions with greater than 76 lots shall provide amenities such as a park area with seating, a ball field, soccer, baseball, softball, football or similar and parking spaces. For subdivisions with less than 20 lots or or proposed in areas with steep slopes where construction of public spaces would be environmentally damaging, the applicant may request a payment in lie of the on-site construction of public space amenities as required in this section. The fee shall be set at 105% of the cost estimated for the required amenities. The application shall provide a detailed construction cost analysis analysis that shall be reviewed by the town planner and town engineer. All land to be reserved for dedication to the town for park purposes shall have prior approval of the town council and shall be shown marked on the plat reserved for public park. this provision the provisions of the section are minimum standards and so you can do more but

I think we should I'll take a look at it make some comments and bring it back again

I'd like to hear what other counties have been doing on neighborhood bars

yeah we took that as an action item from the workshop so we're working on that

all right anything else

good

all right I'll be super quick

okay so I went to to the capital with the early learning coalition for children's week. So, uh we did readings throughout the capital. We read to the Senate kids and had really good conversations with our legislators of the importance of um early learning and the services that these um provide for our low-income families and our kids. So, that was a great trip. And this was our um popup pantry in Hudson. And this was called Winter Paradise and we are going to be starting to go in there every month. So we fed around 145 families just in this RV park. So um we had a great turnout and they were very appreciative.

And that's all I have.

Wait, Commissioner Joerger and I are going to work on a project. Oh, if you don't mind me saying this, if you remember, you can hopefully don't change your mind. We're gonna work on um uh raised bed gardens at the

Oh, yeah.

the Pasco Hope. And so um we have to get with you and Catholic Charities. But anyone else who wants to help do I may my I may be volunteing, how is that word? Volunting.

Voluntelling my brother who just is building some in his backyard over over here off of Rowan um to come help build some for us.

Oh, nice.

Yeah. So, I just think that was so good for the the homeless ten that's there to have some gardening going on.

Okay, county administrator,

just real quick, I see that Barrett's here, but uh I wanted to congratulate our public works uh road rehabilitation MSTU team for winning America uh the American Public Works Association's professional team of the year.

Wow. Why doesn't that surprise me?

Granford. Again, those guys are out getting it done and so um it's it's good to see that recognition flow through.

That is not surprising. Pasco is just brings home the hardware. Yeah.

Tell you it's a great thing.

Good out there.

So, no, that is all.

Okay. County M County attorney.

It's a shame we're going to have to bring back PES if the legislature tax authority.

Oh god.

Don't say that three times.

Don't say that.

I'm not going to sleep.

Leave that alone, Mr. Yes.

All right. Do you have the pictures? So, I don't have pictures. I I'm on Facebook, but I can't seem to pull them up, but we did a great cleanup over Gulf Highlands Palm Terrace. Um, a lot of trash got pulled away and the team did a phenomenal job on a Sunday. So, thank thanks for all the volunteers. That's vice president of St. Leo. We did the Grow Pasco event, sixth annual at St. Leo Wellness Center. It was a great greatly attended uh a lot of great sponsors that helped pay for the cost uh supporting the supporting the project and we had a lot of business people that were there from years ago as let's say firsttime new business people and then coming back to actually help the business grow that that are just getting started as well. So it was really a a nice balanced group that was a lot of great information. Uh they loved it so the team did a great job on that. Um, and we'd have the Chesco Fiesta going on right now. Uh, that's Adam Shoemaker and Brenda Glass.

Oh, Brenda.

Brenda was so surprised. Uh, but two two great uh royalty figures for us through uh next coming years. And that's all I've got. So, we're ajourned.

Okay.

Oh, wait. You want to see it?

Yeah.

I just had to stand up. there.

Okay. Um so so Happy.