9.3.24 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

I got to go pick up tonight. Okay. This time I'd call back to order the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners meeting of uh September 3rd, 2024. Please silence all electronic devices and u mute your microphones. I will proceed with u public hearing starting with P49. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, we have proof of publication of the hearing of this matter in the Tampa Bay Times, July 10th, 2024. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh item P49 PD24079 is the uh ordinance for the tree preservation and replacement. This item is being requested for a date uncertain. Do you need a motion to continue? Uh, yes. Move to continue. Second. Is it a time certain? No. No time certain. Okay. I got a motion in a second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Motion pass 50. Move on to P50. We have proof of publication and uh affidavit of certified mailings in the times on August the 7th, 2024 and by certified mailings and site posting. Item P50 is PDE 240024. This is an ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment of the future land use map 2-15 and she 12 from res 3 residential three dwelling units per gross acre and agricultural to PD plan development on approximately 100.8 8 acres of real property located at the souththeast corner of the intersection of US 41 and Leland Avenue and 1.1 miles north of State Road 52 in a text amendment creating sub area policy flu 7172 Fletcher and a map amendment to the future landings map 2-9 adding sub area map 2-9 72 Fletcher and adding and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repealer servability and effective date this comes with a recommendation to approve the comp or adopt the comprehensive plan amendment uh and uh approve it approve your roll call vote and we have a presentation. I don't know about you guys. I'm having a hard time hearing. Yeah, it's hard to hear you there. Mr. Chairman, I'm receiving a couple of emails from folks that they're having issues hearing as well. Watching online. Go ahead. Test test. We can't hear you. Somebody needs to turn that up. The end up or put the end up. test. You got to be closer to test. There we go. All right. That's better when you do that. Do you want me to reread the ordinance title? Yes, please re ordinance amending the FE County comprehensive plan providing for a

comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 and she 12 from res 3 residential three dwelling units per gross acre and agricultural to PD plan development on approximately 100.8 8 acres of real property located at the southeast corner of the intersection of US 41 and Leland Avenue and 1.1 miles north of State Road 52 and a text amendment creating sub area policy flu 7.172 Fletcher and a map amendment to the future len use map 2-9 adding sub area map 2-972 Fletcher and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repealer servability and effective date this goes to you with a recommendation to approve the proposed tech comp plan amendment and adopt the ordinance by roll call vote and there's a presentation if desired. Um yeah, I think we need a presentation. Agree. Yeah, agree. But I'm waiting. Um okay, something's that's item P50. So what's what's the issue? This land they're not matching. This one that that the land that one was P49. So something's wrong in Right. Yes. 49 was the land was the tree. You're right. And P50. So I don't know what's going on up there, but maybe go to P-51. That's correct. So may So what's the next one? What do you have? Wait a second. That's it. Memo number is correct. So I think if go to the next slide and that's the ordinance title. Okay. Yes. Okay. So this is it. Yes. So this is the location of the subject property in the central market area. This is generally northeast uh corner of US 41 and 52 uh just on the north and west side of pilot country airport. The proposal is a comprehensive plan amendment to change the future land use from res 3 residential food belongings for gross and agricultural to plan development. PD plan development. And the purpose is to allow for 160 town homes, 350 multif family, and 100,000 square ft of commercial and approximately 100.8 acres. Uh the location, as I noted previously, is on the northeast corner of the intersection of US 41 and Leland, which is generally the uh northeast uh corner of US 41 and 52 as we'll see on the next slide here. So 52 and 41 is just off the slide to the south. Uh, and the subject property is outlined on the west side and north side of Pilot Country Airport right here. Uh, and there's the intersection that we've been I've been noting, 52 and 41. Uh, there are a number of trails uh, that surround the subject site.

Crosswfire access south trail which runs along US 41 and then of course the stable 52 trail down south uh, along 52. Uh this is uh the wetland scenario that we're contending with in terms of developing the 100 or so acres and this is indicating the proximity of the subject site within the pilot country airport zone and as I noted there are portions of the uh Fletcher sub area within the RPZ of the airport zone. These are the other MPUDs within the area. On the west side, we have Tala Vera. Uh Longleaf Grove MPUD is just to the south. This was approved recently uh maybe a year and a half or so ago. And then Sandridge and Tibbitz. Um these were also recent that were approved uh or reapproved a couple months ago uh in this area. These are the entitlements that surround the Fletcher uh subject site. As noted, 160 town homes, 350 multif family, 100,000 commercial on the subject. In Tala Vera, there are approximately 800 single family homes. Enterprise Commerce Park um had has 235,000 non-residentials, 235,000 ft of non-residential, uh 200,000 ft of heavy industrial, 35,000 commercial. The Longleaf Grove MPUD has 1,67 residential entitlements built into it. Uh not yet constructed, 126,000 uh square feet of non-residential. Uh and those are the immediate surrounding entitlements to this MPUD. Uh this is a conceptual of the sub area. uh the planning development economic growth department worked with the state with the uh property owners and the and the developers to come up with a conceptual plan that would illustrate the type of commercial development uh we could expect both on this block here and then if multif family does not happen also on this block right here. Uh, additionally, some other design features that we incorporated uh, into the discussions was the rear loading of town homes and how that might uh, be accommodated if town homes were to be established in other parts of the MPUD that were interior uh, to the to that development. Uh, all of that information is taken care of within the MPU later on the agenda. Mr. Chairman, can you go back just go back to the slide for a minute? Yes. So along 41, the northern part of it, um you've got those boxes that are the darker red. That's where the multif family can go. Yes. And down below it's a little bit lighter of a color and that's where either commercial or multif family could go. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Uh this is the existing future land use of the area with the res 3 on the west western portion of the property and the AG on the eastern portion of the property sort of at the end of the uh pilot country runway. This is the new future land use PD plan development

being applied to the site. Uh these are the objectives and policies that uh conform this project to the comprehensive plan. And then as noted, we recommend to the board of county commissioners that we find the proposed amendment consistent with the competitive plan adopt the ordinance by roll call vote. Mr. Chairman, I ask some questions. Yes. Um, so this is just a comp plan amendment change. This portion of the project uh later on on the agenda there is an MPU today cuz I just want to make sure that site plan is binding first of all. Did a lot of work on that site plan. Um, and then the next question I have is, um, if you could go back to it and maybe I'm sorry, I looked at this last whenever I had my meeting with Carbala, but I haven't gone back to it yet, but this issue came up on our phone call today that I that what what is going to be in front of this project along 401? Is it the sidewalk or multi-use trail or or a multimotal trail path, whatever? cuz when I looked I don't I can't tell if there's anything there. Mr. Chairman, last question. Mr. Mayor, I was going to suggest we actually listen to before we vote on this. Let's go do P58 and go through and then you can all get all the technical questions out. Yeah, we can do that. Is that all right? Yeah, Mr. Terry, let's bring 58 up. P58. Okay, good afternoon. Liam Divine, planning development and economic growth department. This is item P58. Before I begin, um I do want to do some housekeeping. I did receive expartes um for all commissioners and um which will be submitted to the clerk's office. And if we could for the record uh we have the hearing or public publication of this item on the May 1st 2024th edition of the Tampa Bay Times and an affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. This item was continued from the June 18th, 2024 meeting to the August 21st, 2024 meeting where it was continued to today. So item P-58 PDE 24-7739 in the name of Fletcher MPUD. This is an MPUD zoning amendment from AC agricultural district and R1MH single family mobile home district to MPUD master plan unit development to allow for the development of 350 multif family dwelling units, 160 town home dwelling units and 100 square ft of commercial and associated infrastructure. It's on the south side of Leland Avenue and east of US Highway 41. The subject site is located in the central market area and is outside of the urban service and rural areas. Here's an aerial view. A little bit more of a zoomed in aerial view for you. The surrounding future land use. To the north is AG and RES 3. To the east is AG, Res 3, to the south is RES 3 and RO.

and to the west is res 3. The surrounding zoning to the north is AC, RH and C2. To the east is AC and AR. To the south is AR and RH. And to the west is RH, C2 and MPU. As touched on before um in the previous presentation, there are some surrounding MPUDs in the area. um Tel Vera 8 approximately 850 single family homes um Enterprise Commerce Park which has 200,000 ft industrial and 35,000 ft² of commercial um and then the Long Leaf Grows MPUD which I'm going to make a correction from that first PowerPoint. Um there's 95,000 ft of commercial, 15,000 ft of office and it was approved for 350 apartments. Here is our master plan. Okay. Is the what is the red? The red's commercial. The red is commercial. So that's where the commercial can go. And then basically where the yellow is where residential can go. And I'm going to show you um the conceptual plan, right? And then the blue is Sorry, go ahead. The blue is actually the RPZ, which is the runway protection zone. And then basically the dashed red lines that go out from there is actually the approach surface floor that is coming from your airport zoning ordinance that you approved about a year ago. That's in our land development code. So those are required um protection areas for the airport. Okay. Where does the uh cuz I' I've been getting several messages about people didn't mind so much the um town homes, but they did have an issue with the multif family 350 units. Where where are they placed on this map? So So yes, I can well since we had the conceptual up, I can kind of go through that is listed in condition one of your agenda packet. Um the this is a non-binding conceptual but the there is condition one that this map is non-binding. The conceptual is non-binding but the parcels themselves has very specific language on how it can be developed. So the applicant wanted to have the option to use a loom. Um using a loom with a binding conceptual plan can sometimes be tricky because you basically have to have a conceptual plan for each option of the loom. So you would have to have if there's eight different loom options, you would have to have eight different binding conceptuals with that loom. I don't know. I don't know what you're saying. Really, another way to think about this mus playing playing. Another way to think about how Liam just described it is that you have binding patterns that will move from one portion of the site to another portion if they uh elect to do the commercial. For example, parcel A and parcel B. You if commercial went on parcel B, then you would have the binding pattern of parcel A imposed on parcel B. So you have this binding patterns that are able to move across the MPU. Okay. What about the rest of it?

Likewise. Like likewise. So why can't we make this? Okay. So it's somewhat binding. Correct. The pattern is binding. the place. So essentially staff um did agree that in parcel D where you're having town homes right now and D1 um it would also be appropriate to have single family there. So that would be a bit of a step down in density. So having a loom allows parcel D and D1 to have town homes and single family homes. Now where you see um parcel C that has town homes and um multif family apartments. So there we we understood that if you didn't want to have multif family apartments there, the loom does allow that conversion to have town homes there. So essentially where where you're seeing multif family that could be stepped down to town homes and where you're seeing town homes that could be stepped down to where you have single family and that loom allows that. But there is conditions on where that can be. So you can't just have single family across the whole project. You can't have um apartments across the whole project. It it's specific to each parcel. Would those town homes be required to be rear loaded? So 20% in parcel D and D1 would be required to be rear loaded. If they go into parcel D, I believe that jumps up to 30. But you're show you're showing far more than 20% in your in this in parcel D. Wait, what's the white? What's the light colored things? Those are town homes. Okay. So, the brown are the rear loaded and the brown or rear loaded. Let's see if I have a pointer here. So, you you say that's 20%. So, on the conceptual has more the MPD conditions just require a minimum of 20%. I I I I'm have a little bit of heartburn that if if all this work can be thrown off the window. Yeah. Because we have met and met and met. Well, the issue issues I have is the fact that it's conceptual and it's like we're we're designing something that may be built this way or may not be built this way, but the fact of it is it's not engraved in stone. We've seen so many projects that come in here and they show us beautiful pictures and you know, I remember one when I was on the school board on the LPA and it was on 54 um and it was a beautiful commercial project. That's not what we got. Yeah. So, um Okay, Mr. Whiteman. Thanks, Chair. Liam, on your map, can you show us where the line is where the what's it called? The rural transition area is that start right at Leland. So, so yes, above Leland Avenue, which is right north of the site, that would be the rural transition area. I mean, for staff to bring a such a a dense project right up against, you know, cramming it in there, which essentially

that's my description. I don't know if the applicants here, but we've talked about this an awful lot. That's just a lot right up against it. That's not much of a a transition. It the product here, I'm okay with some of it. I'm not okay with other pieces of it. it it just doesn't necessarily fit with what's been built around it and what's going right up against it. So, um to go from as dense as possible right up to the rural transition area, it's bit much for me. It's a bit heavy. Okay, Mr. Mariana and to kind of go along with that a little bit. Um if you look at the retention parcels next to the runway, uh talk to the residents and they can speak about it. When you have a long linear waterway that's right there, it's very good for birds to come in. Birds, geese, I mean it's not very it's not helpful with when you have air air air air traffic. Parcel G needs to be changed as well. So, if we're going to talk about doing a change, that's an area and then maybe that can be incorporated to the side. Um, and Commissioner Stark, you were talking about partial D and you were pretty emphatic as we're going through this through the land use as far as the rear loaded town homes. The map shows us 75% is going to be rear loaded town homes and we're being told it's only be 20%. So, I'm just wondering how did how did that shift happen? So, again, this is a non-binding conceptual step. We have to pay attention to the non-binding stuff. Oh yeah, that's what you do on the money. I'm just bring it out so we can address it. Okay. Um, so staff wanted more. Um, the applicant was very resistant to that. Um, they needed the flexibility, which is also why we have the loom. We understand that they're next to the airport. Um, and things may need to change because they're next to an airport. So allowing that flexibility with aluminum and an unbinding but while still trying to restrict it in the conditions um staff thought was the best approach. You know go ahead. Well, just a thought and I I hear what you're saying um about the it is it is it is a little bit like of a unicorn as far as the density is up there. But um but aside from that, I would say um the legend, you know, maybe the legend is binding and and the form of the development has to stay. I I don't know. I'm just trying to I'm not a planner, not a designer, but I'm I'm troubled. I'm troubled that we're being shown something that we're probably that we may not get when we've worked so hard to get something as as good a layout as this. That troubles me cuz that's why I would that's the only reason I would be inclined to improve it. Approve it. So I maybe we can hear from the applicant. But

um Commissioner Mariano, it seems to me like they've saved a lot of land for the airport. Oh, wish they had No, they did. They got GH and G1. So I think that I think Well, we'll hear from the applicant on the airport study. I think that I think they may have met that, but we'll hear from them. Um, I'm just very concerned that we can see a good layout and then that's not what we get. So, Mr. Chairman. Yeah. So, so as far as the I mean the the airport conditions dictate what had to be preserved. I'm just saying on parcel G and G1, uh, if you look at having the waterway right along is not a good idea. you've got compensating storage on two other parts on G1. Maybe part of it could be shifted over to there because you don't you don't want to have those, like I said, big waterways where flying birds are going to are going to be there. Oh, just line it up more to the edge or something. I don't know. G, you could slide over the the two yellow parts of the composite could probably take more. Maybe one could maybe there could be dry storage instead of wet. So I mean there's I'm sure the applicant will address it now that we're talking about it, but yeah. So let's hear from the applicant. Mr. Chairman, I believe we need to since we moved into zonings uh swear the uh parties. Yep. Do we want to do it individually or do for all the remainder zonings all around? So at this time, any party who is wishing to provide testimony for any zoning matter coming up this afternoon, please rise again for any voting matter in addition to this one. If you would please 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 help you God. Thank you. As you come forward to speak, please acknowledge for the record that you have been sworn. Thank you. Okay, let's hear from the applicant now. Good afternoon. Christy Barer with Height Design. I have been sworn in. Liam did a great job of summarizing the project and I'm glad that the concept plan is still up because I know you guys have a lot of discussions on that and we have worked very hard on this concept plan. Um this project we met with the county over a year and a half ago. There was an airport moratorum. We're obviously adjacent to Pilot Country Airport. So that that slowed down the process quite a bit. Um we you all transmitted the transmitted the comp plan amendment to the state earlier this year. Last month we had the planning commission hearing. They unanimously voted to recommend approval of the zoning to you all this month. And in between all of that, we have continued to work with staff on this concept plan. The reason why it is not binding is because this is a mixeduse project and

the applicant will is not the developer. They will be selling the project to a town home builder, an apartment builder, and a retail builder. Um, so they need to have those enduser builders need to have some flexibility. So in the sub area policies, there's language that says higher density needs to be along US 41 with lower density closer to the airport runway protection zone. In the MPUD conditions, there's two pages of conditions and it, like Liam said, it's condition number one that explain exactly what can go in each of these parcels. So, we broke it up into multiple parcels. So, we could have specific uses, whether it be a residential use or a multif family use, and then also specific design criteria. So in parcel A, we're showing retail adjacent to US 41 in also that internal road. Those buildings in parcel A are required to be pushed up to those roads. So that's in the conditions. You'll also see along the eastern edge that there are some uh town homes or carriage homes that would also be along that internal road with the parking lot hidden by those buildings. So all of those are requirements. So though this plan isn't binding, there are very detailed requirements that just about make it binding. We also worked with staff to say, well, if you know there's more interest in town homes than there is for apartments, we would like the opportunity to have less apartments and move some of those town homes over into parcel C. So, in parcel B, we can have apartments in commercial or we can have just commercial along 41. In parcel C, we can have apartments or town homes. In parcel D, we can have town homes or single family detached. So, we're limiting the product to two different types of product. Um, and then also, like I was saying, in each parcel, there is language in the conditions that say those buildings must be up close to those internal streets. So, that you have that linear park space. You have the buildings up front. You have a nice walkable area. We're showing, you know, a retention pond and a plaza park space and parcel E. And so you can see that again, even though this is not binding, it's very close to what it's going to look like because there's not much wiggle room in those words. Okay. Well, may I see something? Go ahead. Here's what makes me nervous. those pink buildings that could be a car wash, McDonald's. It cannot it cannot be a car wash. Okay? And it cannot be a um self storage. It can be plop and drop with someone who wants a parking all around it instead of like that in a plaza. So, it has to stay as a plaza. The buildings must be up against the roads with the parking lot hidden. Okay. Well, that makes me feel better cuz I'm I just can't take what we've been doing. Um, and I don't think anyone here would disagree with the ability to take the multif family and put it into carriage homes, garden homes, single

family, any of this going down. So, there is a maximum of 350 apartment units. We are requesting a land use equity matrix, but you cannotre increase the number of apartment units. You can only trade apartments for town homes, single family homes, or commercial square footage. But I I I would I for me I would make it a condition that those rear loads that's the minimum that you have in your legend. You can't it's not 20%. That's the minimum right there. You've got town homes rear load 82 carriage homes rear load 52. So that's the minimum that you can have in there. And so the reason why we have a percentage in the conditions of approval means nothing is because if the number of town homes increases or decreases then those numbers on the legend would change and the percentages would change also. So we felt that a percentage mix was a better way to ensure that you would have a good amount of both types of product. Mr. White, thanks. Y'all really want to bring this in for landing, don't you? We really do. We We have worked very hard with staff. They've done an excellent job. I think we've worked with everybody in the planning department. And I know we have lots of expartes with all of you. So, we we do want to get something built here very badly. Yes. So, it very much appreciate everybody's your time and imaging, but I'm good, like I said, with I'm okay with towns. I'm okay with the commercial pieces, but the the multif family, I'll quote Commissioner Starky, is is a unicorn. And when I look at the map, you're literally right up against the rural transition area. It is tall. It's high dense. It doesn't necessarily go with everything that's been built to date and going on within the area. If it was single family product, I'd be all for it. I just I'm like I've told you in all means I'm going with twothirds of what you have going on and I appreciate what's you know what the the creativity and the thought and the time you've put into this but I'm going to have a hard time supporting any vertical multif family with within this project. It's just it's too heavy in my opinion for this little nook. So our apartments are capped at three stories. Town homes and single family homes can be two stories. So it's only one story above the other product types. We were requesting there's got to be a line maybe twotory apartments and that's there's twotory apartments. They have them in in in Starky Branch. Some of them have garages, right? And so if we did the carriage home product that would be a twostory apartment. Um, in this application, in the conditions of approval, we are proposing that if it was vertical mixed use, like the pink building in the northeast corner, that that particular building could be four stories along US

41, that road is planned to be widened. We feel like the height and the density along 41 is appropriate. that we are a mile north of State Road 52, three miles east of Angeline Ranch. Um, and that, you know, other apartments have been approved in this area. And again, maximum 350 apartments. We did hear you and we have increased the opportunity for more commercial. So again, if apartments are, you know, going out of vogue because folks can't get financing, then it might be commercial that goes here instead of apartments or there's less of that. Right now, we don't have a buyer or a builder. So, we're trying to keep it a little bit more flexible. Again, if in the conditions it says that if the apartments go away, if if more commercial is wanted that parcel B, which is showing apartments currently, would mirror parcel A and those commercials would be commercial buildings would wrap US 41 in that internal east west road. So we have provisions for different options of either stepping down or or modifying the uses and it's only two options, right? So it's not like we can do anything anywhere in each particular parcel. there's one or two options that you can have in that parcel. And we think that gives us a the little bit of flexibility that we're looking for to help market this site and actually get something built here rather than locking in this concept plan today and then coming back to you in six months or a year with an actual builder that says, "I don't I can't build this. This isn't in my portfolio." So that's why we're trying to meet in the middle here. Yeah, I've I've got problems with the too much too many apartments in this area. So, just keeps growing and growing, but I've gotten hurt and I guess a lot of my folks that know me got heartburn because they're always calling me about this project. So, they do not like the multif family piece of this. In fact, I don't care for this kind of development like that with those apartments and all out there next to the rural area. Um, we still need to be very careful what we do with our rural area and keep our area as rural as we can. This takes it away from that, I think. And so, I just note that this is the rural transition area, not the northeast Pasco area. There's nothing about this project that looks transitional at all. It just goes right into so north of us is a transition area. Our project is not in the rural area. It's up against the correct prior to the board. So I do have two documents if I could. You got two public hearings to do before you could get but so I go back and do the first. Yeah. So yes. So, you've got to bring this into a for a landing as the commissioner said. Yeah. Um is you're going to have to have a public hearing on the comprehensive plan

and you're going to have to have a public hearing on the zoning. You can allow the folks to combine their times and speak to both identifying which it is which you're speaking to. Okay. That would be six minutes person. Um or you can do the the comprehensive plan and then and then take a vote on that and then see and then go forward on the zoning and have another public hearing on that. But you've got it you've got two different an ordinance and u and the zoning res resolution that you have to take public comment. Okay, Mr. Chairman. Yes. I would like to have a couple of things addressed still with my question I asked a little bit earlier. Yeah. Uh so along the runway with the water that's there was talking to the people that will speak from the neighborhood. Um, the long pond on parcel G is a big concern cuz ducks can get in there, geese can get in there, cause some issues. The parcel on the on the other side, more so along the runway than the rest of it on the far east side is another concern as well. And then you've got the two compensating storage areas. can be set where those can be dry areas instead of wet and shifted over to the compensating areas. We pick up a little bit and maybe shift some elsewhere. So I have two documents if I can submit them to the board. Move to receive file. You got a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Motion pass 5. So the two documents that are being passed out were emailed to each of you last week. um they're from our airport expert as well as our project engineer to discuss a little bit more about the ponds. This item also came up at planning commission last month. They are in the audience and so they can answer your technical questions, but the compensating storage is a flood plane pond and so that will be wet a portion of the year in the in the wet season and it'll most likely be dry in the drier season. Um but if you would like Doug Saunders can come up uh and speak to the shape of the ponds and the guidelines for FAA. Um so again we are not developing anything in the runway protection zone and there are guidelines for the area just outside of the protection zone. What types of ponds can go there? What shapes are better? We also have Boyan Pargo here as the engineer and he can explain the edges of the ponds. We're proposing to have a 4 to one slope so that uh birds I so that uh vegetation will not grow on the edges and therefore birds would be less likely to want to land and be by that water vegetation. But they can come up to answer your questions. Okay, let me go to another question. Um, so as Commissioner Starky said, looking at this map, is that does that show 82 reloaded town homes on it in the dark brown?

The legend says it does. Uh, yes. So, but in the in the conditions, you've got 20%. Is that number the same or is it going to be higher or lower if it's 20%. So the requirement is 20% rear loaded. Whether we do 160 town homes or if we use the loom and do 300 town homes, the requirement is 20% of the total town homes would need to be rearloaded. Okay. So it could be could be a lot less than what this shows right here. How low could that number go? So 160 is currently the proposed number of town homes. So 20% of that would be 32 town homes. Okay. So you're looking from the map we're looking at you're cutting over 50% probably 60% of what is shown here to what we wanted to end up. And so the important thing is we're showing linear parks and trails throughout here. And there's a requirement in those conditions to keep those park spaces. And we talk about pedestrian connectivity. And the reason why we have these town homes here is to make those parks work. So I don't think a builder would stop at 32 if it didn't make sense in their plan. So here we are showing all of these internal because that's how the road network worked out. Okay. But again, it's it's a very big concern as we heard from us to sort of see it get cut in a portion the way it's written. and we try to work with you as far as giving you the matrix compared to the concept plan, but I think it's too big of a drop. Other question for you on the on the multif family on your design here, it shows 288 units in play, but you want the flexibility to go to 350. Why would you put that number up so much higher when you know we're trying to keep it limited? So the 298 multif family units um in Pesco County language multif family also it includes apartments and these carriage homes. So we have we're showing 52 carriage homes. So those two number numbers combined is 350 and a carriage home is basically a garage with a apartment unit on top of it. So, like Commissioner Starky said, those would most likely be twostory and would transition from the three-story apartments, twostory carriage homes, twostory town homes. And so, you're stepping down as you get closer to the project boundary. And I'm having trouble finding the matrix. I have it earlier, but So, if if you had set if we set the matrix up um and use 298 for multifamily, separate the carriage homes for 52, is that a problem? So again, we don't have an apartment builder. We don't know if that builder has a keratone product that they would want to use. So trying to keep that flexibility for that user. I mean, you hear you're hearing density problems at this point. Yes. Okay. Mr. Whiteman, I didn't have my hand raised chair. I think I throw a pencil like that.

Well, um, you can see you can see we're having some angst here, and I know you've worked very hard on this, so I'm going to throw out some ideas and see if it sticks with my fellow board members looking at that legend. I can't I I don't have the conditions of approval on here, so I just have pretty pictures um that maybe mean nothing. Um, I would I'm going to throw out there that if you guys want to see less in the multif family that you find a number. When I did the math, it was 42 units per building. So maybe, you know, maybe think of a a lower number that would be agreeable to you guys. Um, and I would say or you could go down, but you can't you I'm going to hold you to that legend. I mean, no, no, no less than that legend that you're telling us here on everything else. Can you repeat explain the no less like Well, you you and that you say how many town homes do you say there are total? I believe well I think the legend shows I know the legend shows 152 correct what what did you say you're so we're proposing 160 as the so if you have 160 town homes and you say 20% only 20% have have to be reared that's 32 no but and here you're showing 82 I want 82 I don't want 32 um so carriage homes rear loaded 52 I don't want any less than 52 do in here. I I don't want to see and I throw the pictures up there. You can see what we've been building. What sadly more is coming. Um I don't want to see our county filled with with product that looks like that. It's just not it's not good for us. It's not good for our citizens. So um we worked really hard to get a good plan and I'm I'm very disappointed to hear that that all that time that I spent with you could be mean nothing. So it it bothers me. chairman to to or county attorney. Thank you, chairman. So, Commissioner Stark is saying, but the definition of the product of what we're approving, it could be more vertical apartments. No, it could be. No. Well, it's the same definition by our by our ver, right, county attorney, with what is being presented here. They're pitching different multif family options, but it could be all of one type or one of all of another. based on our county's terms, the conditions of approval limit them to c to a certain extent. certain percentage. I'm gonna let Liam deal with that versus but the conditions of approval set parameters so they can't but they do have a loom which means that they can shift things back and forth within those parameters. So, I can't tell you without doing a lot of math what what they could shift everything to. I I understand what the question you're asking, but they've got sort of a this is a hybrid that they it's as they've

said, it's conceptual, but it's not conceptual because there are parameters in the conditions and approval. um that may not get the board what it's looking for. Yeah. Um yeah, but it's they can't shift everything into multif family if that's the concern. Commissioner Weman Liam Divine planning development and economic growth. Um so I I just I want to be clear on your question. And I think your question was, can they use the loom to convert for more apartments? That that's no, they can't. Their max is 350. They can't use, but they're not showing 350 on here. They're showing 294. I I understand that, but I the way I understood the question was could they convert to more apartment units? That the answer is no. Using the L. So with the what you call them garden style. So, so garden style um is included in that 350. So, we consider those apartments. So, garden style which is So, how much can those So, what's the the the lowest number of those that they could have that they could transition? So, what' you say 52 of those? How low can they're showing 52 on how low can you go on those? So, so we can we count garden um carriage homes, sorry, carriage homes exactly like an apartment dwelling unit, right? They are they are the same by definition. So, and a and a a carriage home because essentially they're basically um usually what happens and I live in an apartment complex and I have carriage homes in my apartment complex. There are garages on the first floor. there's four rented outs and then there are one couple apartments a twostory apartment building um although it's a much smaller building um it it operates as that. So essentially, if your concern is could they have 350 um carriage homes, they they could because we consider those apartment units, apartment dwelling units, but they could go to 25 carriage homes and increase their other rental by the opposite of that based on the loom. Yes or no? When you're fluctuating around, you have 52 of what you're describing. So if they dilute that and they only build half of them because they're they're trading and product type, you could increase the other style of multif family. Correct. Is that making sense? Yes. You understand what I'm saying? Yes. But I make me sound smarter than what I am. But but what I I would just add to that I would just add there's still a maximum of 350 apartment dwelling units. No matter no matter what there's a condition that limits to 350 no matter

what they can't go higher than that. Okay. So it's C. So we wanted to show the carriage homes as another option to make sure that it was in the concept plan so that an apartment builder clearly had the option to have those type of units. But what Liam and I agree on, I think to answer your question, is that no matter what the style of multif family, whether it's three-story apartments, the carriage homes, a twostory apartment, the maximum number of those units is 350 units. Say that again. So, so multif family which would be apartments and we're we're requesting three-story apartments unless the first floor has retail or office and then it would be four stories along US 41. So that type of apartment or a carriage home or if someone wanted to do a two-story apartment like you were suggesting, Commissioner Starky, any of those units, the most number of units we could have with all of that combined is 350. Well, I have a question for you on your carriage homes. Okay. If if if what you're calling a carriage home is a garage with the unit above it, how is that different than a town home? someone educating you the difference. So, it's combined and they're rented out potentially to a different individual. So, the garage could be rented to someone that has an apartment somewhere else in the development and a different person could be renting the residential portion. As far as the aesthetics from the street, is that going to be four garages in a row? I mean, I'm looking at the carriage houses in Starky and you don't see that at all. So I don't know what your carriage houses I mean is that potentially what it could be just look like four town homes but they're rented. So what we're proposing is those garage entrances would be internal to that apartment parking lot. So when you're on the street you wouldn't see those garages. You would enter the garages from that larger parking lot space. But really it looks very much like a town home. Yes. Correct. I would think so. So somebody could have the rent that for their car. Yes. But not necessarily be renting the apartment above. That is correct. Interesting. In some instances. In some instances they may rent the garage and the residential portion together. Yeah. But they would have that option and it would be under the apartment builder that's in your building. Liam, that's what it's like where you live. Let me question. I think the preserve has some of those. Liam and Divine. Yes. Um that that is correct. in in my apartment complex, they actually have buildings that are just dedicated garages elsewhere and then they have um the the carriage home

styles and it gets rented out to whoever rents it. It's additional fee in your your lease and you can pick and choose where you want your garage on the property. I don't really see the difference between an apartment then and a carriage house. Yeah. Just that instead of an apartment, you got a garage. Yeah. But personally, in the apartment, not necessarily the person renting the garage. Yeah. Yeah. Mr. So, it could just be that the height on the carriage home a little bit lower. Or would it be the same? Well, what was the height allowed? So, outside threetory. So, carriage one. So, about that. Anyway, I'm I'm sorry, Commissioner. I didn't mean to cut you. Okay. Um I'm Mark Wilkey on the uh represent the applicant on the carriage homes. Were you sworn? Did you I I stood up and said I do. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. I'm good. Um on the carriage homes, uh there's typically no living area on the first floor. It's a garage. Now there the two end units may have access to the one-bedroom apartment above it and then we may have a stack of twos where they have no garage where they don't have access to the garage. So that's the B that's the difference between a carriage home and a regular townhouse that's always going to have probably a garage and then a small living area and then stairs up to the the second floor. There will always be a a carriage home is will have a garage on the uh first floor. And as far as aesthetics go, um, you know, that's going to be those are rear loaded, so they'll come in from the parking lot. And then on the front, we'll, you know, we'll have a they're going to have to match the multif family buildings or somewhat similar to all of that. And and again, if Commissioner, I know we've talked about density, if there's an apartment number that you guys are willing to accept so we can move this thing along after a lot of work. And Commissioner Stark as well as I'm sorry we disappointed you, but two weeks ago at the planning commission meeting, he liked it. So I'm not Well, I thought it was binding. I do like that. Well, okay. But now you're telling me that's not what Well, but Gina, I just sent you to uh we really need to communicate that, you know, we don't have a lot of blue room and the only thing that's going to change this um would be, you know, we're not far enough along in the design to understand, you know, the technical reasons for I don't know how big the we have an idea of how big the retention is, but that may change. the one on the north that may be that may not work and all this stuff has to get moved around but we can only get move it around in

the within those parcels. We've got I mean these conditions of approval if you haven't had the opportunity these things are there's about 85 of them and we're not we can't go in there and just start moving stuff around and plus the other check is staff who was going to go that's a material change and it's not really we don't consider it technical you're going to have to go back to the board to get approval. Yeah. So there's a big there's a big check there with your staff and they've been and I'm not saying they've been uncooperative or difficult. We've we've spent a lot of time on this. So Oh, I agree. That's why I'm saying I mean we've been working very hard. I was okay to go with the legend as a condition of approval and the layout concept. But my fellow commissioners want less density. Well, and the other point and I want to show you an email. Oh, it's not Gina. to Gina and Boy and Christie from height will tell you that that spine road they're the one that goes east west that really can't change or move much based on wetlands and distances to entrances to the south. So, I mean, there's, like I said, we're not This is really close, and you're going to see something very similar that you might see the multif family buildings moved around, but continue to be transitioned to the lower density area as well as covering up the parking lots like we've been asked to do. So, if you don't mind, this is a carriage house in Starky Ranch. It's um And can you I think there's four units in there, and I I just sent two pictures. Um, there's another one, another email. And I don't know what's on the other side, but it looks Yeah, I'm going to show you what's on the other side, right? It looks like this is the parking side. This is the interior of the parking lot. And that's the two street corners, right? So, that is not a row of four units with all garages on the You said no living on the bottom, but there's clearly living on the bottom in a carriage house. So I that's why I'm trying I've never really asked for the definition of carriage house. Well, it's I thought that's what a car if you want to if you want to specify or make another condition of approval that we have to have living area or we have to we have to break that up somehow architecturally. No problem. We can we can figure that out. I got Jack. Thank you. I got Jack. Oh, I'm sorry, Jack. You had a question? No, you're okay. All right. Go ahead, Mr. White. Thank you. Well, you referenced our conversation. I'm glad to hear that you put a lot of effort into Commissioner Starky's points

and not in mine. [Laughter] Got him. There's a there's a I went to the planning commission there. There's a lot of you in there as well. And and I appreciate No, I appreciate that. There's a lot of you in there. Uh again, twothirds, you know, I like the commercial aspect of it. I'm okay with the town's boilerplate. There's just a lot of multi. I'm not going to do the math for you. I was pretty clear when we met what I was hoping to see or would like to see. Now we know kind of the lay of the land here, right? You kind of see what we want. What are you willing to do? Is there is there a number of I don't want multif family period. Well, I I mean I like the towns which could be considered that, but I don't want to see my preference bumping up against this transition period. This is high dense product next to product that's very different than what this is. If I if I went to if I went to 300 multif family because that's a massive if I went to 300 multi including the carriage homes. No, we went through this in our meetings respectfully. No, I'd like to see either you got a town home product or single family home product, commercial frontage along 41. That's my opinion. I don't know what the other four are. I mean, I remember a call completely eliminating multifamily. As a matter I remembered on I'm not against multifamily. I just don't want Well, I see the tea leaves now. It's not like, you know, we're horse trading in these meetings, right? I don't like this. I twothirds of it I'm there and that's I've been very consistent in my talking points on this. So, I mean that this is this is on y'all. It's not on me to do your math and make your decision for you. Yeah. Okay. I think we need to move to u move over to the public. Let's hear from the public. And this is a public meeting. And what we're going to do is if you're as has anyone signed up at all? No one signed up specifically for the P50. P50. Everyone's under 58. Okay. And everybody's signed up for 58. So we're going to do we're going to hear from the public on both. But when you come to that podium, state your name that you and your address and that you've been sworn and speak to if you say you're here to speak on 58, then speak to 58 and then sit down and we'll take you in order the way they're signed up. Yeah. And if you have comments on both, just say, "I've got comments on the comprehensive plan or I've got comments on the zoning." Yeah. Just say that when you come to

speak. If you want to speak toward both, you can at that same time. Okay. So, the first signed up in advance, Roberto Garcia. My name is Roberto Garcia. I live at 11581 Pilot Country Drive. I have lived there since 78. And I wasn't confused until I got here. I started listening to you guys. Have you been sworn? I'll be sworn. Okay. So, for sure. Go ahead. Um, couple of items. Uh, first of all, I'd like to explain to you all the ownership of that whole area. Pal, you only have so much time. So, I understand, but I have nine people behind me. I'm probably going to repeat. Okay. Yeah. So, it's Pal Country State. It's divided into three parts. There's the airport. There's an owner for the airport. And there's Paluna Drive, which all the home lots on that road are the owners and driver lane that's owned by the HOA. So, the biggest problem we have, the first problem we have is the situation with that gate. That gate right there, the access gate. We don't want that gate. We're not going to allow any cars coming up and down there. We have enough problems with the general traffic. People that come into the neighborhood on a uninvited go and take pictures of airplanes and all that. So that gate right there, the contractor can save its money. We don't want it. We don't need it. Well, sir, if there's a restaurant in there or something that you want to visit and you this way you can walk there or whatever without having to get out on 41. So I I is that a pedestrian gate? And I think that's for for your neighborhood. I understand. This is public hearing. The problems. You're taking up his time. All right. The problem is that that road is used by airplanes and airplanes don't have any reverse fly. So how are you going to back up if you got people coming and going through there? So the answer that we have is no. Okay. That's it. I still got time, right? You still got time. Okay. The second item that we want to talk to you about is a letter that you were supposed to give to all the people that buy property around there. And I got a copy here that I can give it to you all that you're supposed to give it to the owners of the property that going to buy some of those residents in there that there is a runway next door that's been operating for 44 years, 365 days, 24 hours a day, and it makes noise. And you're supposed to sign that. This came to my attention when some of the neighbors on the neighborhood across the way on 41 came complaining to us and we asked them didn't you sign this piece of paper and the answer was no somebody forgot to give them this piece of paper and that's to protect us and them as well. So I have the whole thing in here if you somebody wants a copy of that proceeding

file second got a motion second all those in favor say I. I motion pass 4. Thank you sir. All right. So, some of the fellows that come behind me are going to cover the rest of the stuff. So, we won't bore you to death. So, I'll step down for that. Uh, Robert, do you want to talk about the pawns? The ponds. Did you want to talk about the ponds? All right. I'm a pilot. I fly airplanes all the time. I've hit an airplane. I I with my airplane, I hit a bird, a basel hidden lakes. It made a big mess on my wing. And that's because they had ponds on both sides of the of the runway over there. When the birds pick up a a fish and they're leading in the on the side of the of the runway and you come in through there and you make noise, they start flying and what happens? They go up and that's when the head comes in. So those two items right there, the one on the left and the one on the right, you got to get them out of there. It's not too bad today, but if that runway ever gets extended and you got bigger airplanes, a crash of those bigger airplanes into that subdivision is going to create a lot of problems. And it does happen. Let's look at the news. Every week you see a bird taken off of somewhere. Okay. I cover that. Thanks. All right. Tom Cooper. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman. Yes. While we're waiting, Mike, can you have um staff make a copy of that for all of us, that letter? Thanks. Okay. State your name and address and if you've been sworn. Good afternoon. My name is Tom Cooper. I have been sworn in. Uh I've been a address. My address is 11628 Pilot Country Drive. Okay. I've been a Pasco County resident for the last three years. Uh I live in Pilot Country Estates at Pilot Country Airport. I own a private aircraft. I fly regularly in and out of the airport. I've been flying since uh 1979. I have over 45 years of experience flying many different types of airplane, civilian, military, and commercial. I've logged over 17,000 hours so far. Uh I was previously a pilot in the United States Air Force, 28 years military service, flying all kinds of different airplanes. While in the Air Force, I worked as an airfield manager. I worked as a wing safety officer. Um I have experience on many different uh busy military airfields, many different kinds of airplane safety investigations and air aircraft safety programs. I'm currently an airline captain with the US uh major airline. I fly domestic and internationally all around the world. Uh I go in and out of all kinds of airports. Uh I've been employed with the airline for over 24 years. I am also the uh elected one of the

Cooper and the airport itself. The staff needs to consult with the homeowners association, not the airport. They do not always represent our own interest. I thank you for your time. Thank you, Paul Prince. My name is Paul Prince. I live at 11649 Pilot Country Drive, Spring Hill. I have been sworn. Okay. I think one of Pasco County's slogans is uh open spaces and vibrant places. I think you're going to have to post a sign at the beginning of that subdivision that says tight spaces and vibrating places because especially the people on parcel D are going to really hate the airplanes noise that is going to be taken off and landing right next to them. Parcel D's definitely a bad idea. Uh the two retention ponds, another bad idea. Um, you're going to be displacing gopher tortoises and there's cows. We like the cows that are there now. We have a good time with the cows. Um, just all around bad idea to uh allow this to go forth. I think a commercial development would be much more acceptable, less loss of life if some accident were to occur. And um, we are a separate entity from the airport. The airport owner uh does not speak for us. Sometimes he does, but uh we are separate. The homeowners association and the property owners are separate from the airport itself. So uh we'd like to uh be included in any future planning. Thank you for your time. Can I ask a question? Thank you. Can I ask a question? Okay. Well, I'm going to ask them questions. They all have to come up one by one. Okay. Jav want me to do it? Ask you. Okay. Are there any two houses, twotory houses in Pilot Country? Yes. Um, how if they're not in line with the runway? Okay. And how close are these houses here to on the runway to the runway? There's some stories. There are some two stories on the runway. Okay. Well, you know, I'm I'm having a little There's a big difference between you guys to live there, but not everyone else to live there. Not even near the runway. being in the middle of the runway and in the takeoff and landing zone because we're getting complaints now of people flying too low over the houses and Tala and we're getting noise complaints from them. I spoke to the airport manager this morning and we we still receive those. Well, you know, people can complain that doesn't mean that something's going to change. Well, they didn't get the letter. My son was a Tala resident until he bailed out. And

I wouldn't live in that town home right near the airport. But I but I just, you know, there's twotory houses closer to the runway than the town houses are to the runway. Um, and I Hey, I have two Air Force pilots in my family. Um, so I Okay. I think there's a big difference between living beside the runway and living in the takeoff zone and the downwind. Yeah. I mean that I don't know what the right answer is, but I just see a little contradiction here. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Yes, sir. Rick Warner. Thank you, county commissioner and commissioners. Uh, my name is Rick Warner. I've been this sworn in and I do swear also. So, address your address, sir. Your address? Address. Oh, I'm sorry. Uh, 11710 Pilot Country Drive. Uh I live on the actual runway and the commissioner some people have brought up the points today that really need to be considered and for those reasons we'd ask that we make the changes. To my understanding the developer has never contacted the homeowners association or worked with us at all which I think uh would be a good idea. We're not against development. We're into safety. I'm a former air traffic controller and what you've created there is what's called a kill zone. You cannot have that high density that close to the runway. You're going to cause an accident. I mean, can you imagine nowadays a 12-year-old out there with a 200 mph drone, what that would do for an airplane coming into land. What a lot of people that aren't pilots don't understand is takeoff and landing, as Mr. Prince was pointing out, that's the most dangerous part of flying. So, you have somebody overshoot that runway and you're going right into the high density area. This is really not compatible with the area. We're all in favor of development, but we're asking that the parcel G uh parcel uh G1, the G area to the left with that retention pond and D has to be reworked. I mean, it's just a serious safety issue. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mark Bud. name and address and if you've been sworn. Okay. It's uh I've been sworn and it's uh 11748 Driver Lane, Spring Hill, Florida. Okay. Got it. Which is that pile of code on the uh on the east side. visit been a resident. Speak into that mic, sir. been a resident there since uh let's see 2000 and uh Robert Garcia already entered into the letter that I got originally talking about statute 333 and the uh I'm sorry it's really hard to uh Robert Garcia already entered into that that letter when he first came up one thing that I wanted to uh just point out to you and I got a picture on my

phone if I can just come up there and show it to you. The effect of a bird strike that happened to me two years ago at Pilot Country. You're a flyer. You fly. You You can't do that, sir. You can't do that. You can't put it in We can't put it into the record unless we take your phone. I can uh Maybe I can just We understand that. You can email it to You can email it to you can you can put phone where we we'll give you phone back to you. Go ahead with your statement if you will. So that uh well there we go. That did about 30 grand damage to that airplane. If that had been moved over just a little bit to that air intake, that airplane would have gone down. So just think about taking off the airport and 6 in over taking that air intake out with the the force of that impact. That impact was a force of approximately with a it was a buzzard probably about six thou 6,000 lbs of force that went into that aircraft. It was lucky that I was able to get back. Now, if that had brought down that aircraft on the takeoff with th those uh could go on those homes, those homes on the end of the runway, there's nothing pilot could really do about that. You know, he might be able to avoid it, might not. So, that's that's a problem with that kind of density that close to the airport. Okay. So that's really the the additional point in in addition to my letter that's already been invented that uh you know this this type of thing can happen and I've been flying for over 40 years and that's the only time that ever happened to me. So, it's not that frequent, but in Florida with the uh bird activity, it's uh much more prevalent than it ever has been. So, it's really all I got to add than I've already done. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you for your comments. Emma Hendas, I should have called Walgreens. Good afternoon. I've been sworn. My name is Emma Hemnes. I'm of Hemnes Fowler Law at 309 North Parsons Avenue in Brandon, Florida. Um, I'm here predominantly as a flight enthusiast and a recent visitor to Pilot Country Estates. Um, it was kind of interesting one of the first times I drove out there and I don't know if you get the full picture because it's not in the development plan, not in the concept, but the actual roadways are the taxi ways. And so there's nothing quite as scary as you thinking you're in a pretty big car and you see this plane taxiing towards you. You're not going to get in a a um a match of chicken with with this. So, the reason why I'm bringing that up is because that gated access and there's not been a whole lot of

attention um paid to that um particular topic in this conceptual plan. I keep hearing this this this afternoon about the conceptual plan is it's binding but it's not binding but it might be binding if there's certain restrictions. So the concern is is from the August 8 video and getting a transcript from that is a lot of the uh aspects of this the the residents in the community were not included. They weren't included in the development and I can see how there's so much work that's gone into this. But I was I heard in the August 8th video presentation, you hear staffers from the planning commission saying, "Well, we've included everybody. We've had numerous meetings." And unfortunately, the Pilot Country residents, they get they show up for the very first meeting on August 8th, and they're kind of in the dark. They haven't had any input in this. And they're actually private property owners that will be impacted by anyone coming in and out of that community, particularly the gated access. And if everybody believes that the gated access is only going to be like a one-way street, that's not going to happen with that level of density. Someone's going to find a way to come on that taxi way and they're going to have that look and play chicken just like I did the other day with, you know, thinking you're in a vehicle, but you've got to give way to those airplanes cuz that's an active taxi way. But again, I think more importantly than anything, there is a community here. They want to work with everyone. They want to be included. They want to work with the developer. They want to work with your staffers. And I would just recommend that this not go through today just so that these other aspects can be worked out for the safety of the community. Christopher Buell. Thanks so much. Christopher Bule. I'm a resident at 11 1934 Driver Lane. I have been sworn in. Um I'm kind of at the end of the list of the residents that have spoken so far. So they've basically summarized all the points that that I would have uh brought up myself of the gate, the uh water foul in the lakes, the noise, the liability and things like that. The one thing I really wanted to highlight u that Tom brought up and and Emma just summarized as well is um a means of us being notified I the HOA would be an easier way of doing that for not only this but anything going forward of future zoning issues just like Emma said so that we could be involved with the process going forward. Um my wife was one of the two people that did the majority of the speaking I think from um from the resident standpoint at last month's meeting uh while I was out of town and it was kind of a scramble because they knew about it about two days before. So uh if I could highlight one thing um that's that there's a a means of us being at least notified so that we can be a part of the process and uh be aware of these meetings so that we can participate as well. Thanks for everybody's time. Okay. Thank you,

Mr. Chairman. That's the last I have signed up that is present. Um, we do have one online also. Is there anyone in the room that gentleman come speak? He's already spoke. Oh, if you've already spoke, you cannot come up, sir. No. Sorry. Yeah. Yes, sir. If you hadn't signed up, you can come forward and speak. Mr. Chairman. Yes. Being we're doing this for two public hearings at one time. If you only spoke for three minutes, couldn't we give him an extra time if you want to make another point? Because you're doing item 50 and 58. Well, no one's no one signed up for 50. There's no one that signed up. Okay. WebEx either. We have one. We have one, but it it'll be coming up actually two. WebEx is after those are here. Okay. Yes, sir. Name and address and if you've been sworn. Uh, my name is Dennis Herstein. I live at 11757 Driver Lane. Florida. I haven't been. If you would please raise your right hand. Do you swear that any testimony you will give in this matter is the truth? So, have you got it? I do. Okay. Wanted to address a point that was uh brought up about, you know, multi-story houses being on the airport itself and and not seeing the difference between houses there at the end. The issue is is that this is an uncontrolled field. We fly a pattern around that airport that's dictated by the FAA. The traffic pattern is a left-hand pattern. So, anything departing departing to the north on 36 there makes a left-hand turn directly over top of that development. You will be at a couple hundred foot above those houses when you're making that left-hand turn to join the downwind, which is basically on 41 or just a little bit to the west of 41. That's the major issue with protecting that zone. So having that high density there, like he says, that's the most critical time is on climbout that you can experience an engine failure. At that point, there is no turning around and coming back to the airport. The only thing you can hope for is to continue straight and make an emergency landing somewhere straight in front of you. And as somebody that has survived an airplane an airplane crash, I can tell you it's very real. and they typically end in a fire and you're talking about burning down several units now if you have them all tied together there. So I'm not opposed to any kind of development other than high density. If you want to do some commercial warehouse space, that sort of thing, it's going to be more compatible with the activity that's going around there. Like they said, Pasco County Sheriff uses that runway on almost a weekly basis for training. It's a lot of noise generated by helicopters. The Air National Guard

comes by there in Blackhawk sometimes as late as 10 o'clock at night and hovers and lands in the middle of that runway at night practicing coming and going. So we at the airport accept that as part of living there. Most of us actually enjoy the traffic and and want to see the activity. These people that are going to be unsuspecting that are going to move into this subdivision that nobody's going to probably notify them that it's there. By the time they invest their life savings into a structure now they're stuck. So, I would really like to see the zoning be changed to something that's more compatible with the current use. Our density is one house per acre. The houses to the east of us are higher than that. So, a lower density would be much better suited for this this area here. Thank you. Thank you, sir. So, that's everybody that signed up. Has everybody in the room that want to speak to this item that hasn't spoke? Seeing no one, we go to WebEx. We had uh one gentleman signed up for both 50 and 58, but I'm is not online at this time. That's the only one we have. Yes. Okay. He's you got to be on quue, so we'll move on. So, um rebuttal. Applicant rebuttal. Yep. Applicant rebuttal, please come forward. Angela Halber, Hillward Henderson here for the applicants. Um, at this time it at this time it sounds like we're a lot further away than we thought we were after the amount of conversations we've had with staff, with all of you, and with the airport owners, and have had multiple discussions. Um, we thought we were further along, but it sounds like we still have work to do. Um, it sounds like the neighborhood wants us to have additional conversations with them and we respectfully request a continuence at this time and a 30-day continuance. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Mayor, I want to I want to say thank you for that cuz clearly I tell you I think the rest of us thought that anytime the abuing community that you would have talked to him I I I knew you talked to the airport but I thought it was a given that you all did it. So, and our rules from what they tell me doesn't make us do that. But I'm going to say I think in the future we should take a look at anytime we have anything where we're going to have some access management issues that neighborhood or process besided need to be notified and maybe we need to look at that. Um, so again, I think you've heard all the concerns. You want to address those? I'll move to continue. It would be the October meeting in Dade City is October 8th according to my calendar and it would be at 1:30 or soon thereafter is saying may be heard. That would be the motion for the comp plan amendment P 50 and then

I'll take another one on 50. So this is one motion for 50 this motion for 50. I second. I got a second. All those in favor say I. I I motion pass 50 to continue on October 8 and then you need a motion on 58. Move to continue P58 to October 8th 1:30. I that okay I got a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. Motion pass 5. So the vote be continued to October 8th. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Now we'll move u move back to P51. We approve the publication of the hearing of this matter in the July 24th, 2024 edition of the Tampa Bay Times. And before you start, Terry, for the uh pilot country, if you will leave your address and email downstairs and the HOA also do the same thing with the girl that answers the phone. Her name's Cherry. If you'll leave that number before you before you leave so I can contact you in the future. Okay. All right, Cherry. [Applause] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Victoriaos Pitos Planning Development and Economic Growth item P51 is file number PDE 240336. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code amending section 303.5 common procedures pre-application consultation. Section 305.1 neighborhood meeting intent and purpose. Section 402.3 use permits conditional uses. Section 525.3 C1 Neighborhood Commercial District conditional uses. Section 525.4 C1 Neighborhood Commercial District special exception uses section 526.3 C2 general commercial district conditional uses. Section 907.3 stacking spaces and drive-thru facilities creating section 1106 car wash facility standards. Appendix A definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency. providing for applicability, repealer, providing for serverability, inclusion into the land development code and an effective date. This is the first public reading or discussion of the ordinance. So, no action is required today. Uh I will proceed into the presentation. So what I would like to do today is to discuss the journey uh in developing the proposed ordinance u by talking first about existing conditions and observations then talk about consistency in terms of what the comp plan supports and lastly get into the actual proposed ordinance. Uh the purpose of the ordinance is to establish new land development code standards for car wash facilities in Pasco County. This was pursuant to a board directive that was issued last fall. Uh the frequency and location of lowemployment generating car

wash businesses and county arterials and collectors created a public concern such that the BCC directed the planning development and economic growth department to develop new standards to regulate the frequency, location, and the design of these. uh and as I mentioned we're going to talk about the existing conditions the consistency with the comprehensive plan and then the proposed ordinance and then there have been uh extensive stakeholder uh outreach and input received with multiple meetings from different different interests. So to go into the existing conditions uh on the screen is a a map of the west market area. This is uh indicative of what's kind of happening across the county. So, this is just a sample size, if you will. There's 25 freestanding car wash facilities across the county, four freestanding car wash facilities in this in the various cities, 10 self-service car wash facilities, four handwash service facilities, and 29 gas stations with car washes as ancillary spread across the county. That's the total inventory. Overall, that's approximately 72 different types of opportunities to wash one's car. Oh, yeah. I'm um on this uh slide, what you'll see here is the cross a small uh audit of the cross county thoroughares that are criss-crossing the county north and south. Obviously, we have a lot of roads in the county, but here I'm particularly talking about those roads which go from county line to county line from the east side all the way to the coast. So you have 11 approximately 11 north south roads which would include US9 Rowan middle starky moon lake alignment sunlike shady hills alignment US41 land of lakes state 54 old pasco alignment Bruce Balls Boyette Mckendry alignment curly meadow point alignment handcart Morris bridge US301 and old Lakeland alignment those are basically the major north north south roadways and then we have uh six major east or west to east roadways. That would be the state road 5456 alignment, the state 54 zephr high zephr hills bypass island boulevard and county road 54 alignment. Rangeland eron cutoff uh alignment ridge and overpass alignment which those two actually don't connect but they run along a familiar parallel just to point it out. This is ridge and it ends currently on the vision road map anyway at US 41 and then there's a gap and then there's a pickup again right about at I75 and continues and then state road 52 of course and then county line road along Hernando County and this is simply to illustrate which roads are moving uh across the county and this is kind of an important point to consider because uh these are limited frontages there are not that many opportunities for employment generating land uses to line up on these major cross cross county roadways. And so one ought to be considerate of the types of uses that are putting themselves uh along these roads. Um, back last fall, one of the ideas was

uh that uh car washes were low employment uh generating land uses, but they were also um creating a certain visual that we potentially wanted to avoid, including uh pictures like this where the various pertinances are out front and visible to passerby traffic and essentially to the community. and also this which illustrates the wide expanses of land that they're picking up along these frontages plus the pertinances that are out in front. And so one of the buildings are hidden behind the road. Yes, sir. Quick question. How does that meet how does it meet our landscaping code? That's not us. That's not us. Okay. Neither was the other one cuz that had an illegal setting. I already figured that out. The building this is sort of the direction. See how much my service? Yeah. This is sort of the direction that the my the board was looking at where you had the building near to the roadway for vacuum stations and various other preferences located behind terms of a horizontal layout for freestanding car wash. So in terms of the consistency analysis, one of the things that we had to take a look at was what the comprehensive plan was uh noting. And so policy flu 11810 uh is the preservation of capacity for employment generating uses and policy ED162 is also a policy for the preservation of capacity for employment generating uses. There are two different elements but it's essentially the same policy. The comprehensive plan notes that the county shall through the development review process ensure adequate land and transportation capacity is available for present and future highpaying employment generating land uses. So the development review process noted in the comprehensive plan begins with the regulatory framework of the land development code and the provisions of the land development code establish the standards against which a review is conducted which is the review process itself. Establishing the proposed standards for car washes in the land development code will ensure adequate land and transportation capacity is available for employment generating land uses because the draft provisions will regulate and condition the design proximity and frequency of car washes on on the transportation corridors. Uh the proposing regulation for design and frequency as well as establishing car washes as conditional uses will enable the county to assess the impacts of such development and spread it out sufficiently to make space for employment journey land uses along these corridors. Uh the proposed amendments are consistent with this policy in this regard. Policy flu 143 transitional land uses and policy flu 1.6.3 6.3 also titled transitional land uses similar same policy living in different parts of the comprehensive plan. Um the comp plan is typically these policies are

typically used to transition specific land uses between one another. It is they're also used to ensure an appropriate mitigation of impacts using land development code standards such as landscape buffers, noise mitigation measures, hours of operation, etc. And the proposed amendments work to ensure an appropriate design relationship between in this case car washes and surrounding land uses. In addition, the policy also works to manage the redevelopment of areas no longer appropriate as viable residential areas. Properties identified for commercial development or redevelopment are typically understood as generally not viable or appropriate for residential development alone. Um, in understanding that a property is more appropriately designated as non-residential or at least mixed use, policy 3163 requires the management of said non-residential development or redevelopment. And the proposed amendment seeks to manage this uh the development and redevelopment of sites for car washes and the application of the conditional use process and the new standards to ensure mitigation of impacts and reasonable transition between uses. So the proposed amendments are consistent with this policy. And then finally, policy flu 144, which is residential compatibility buffer standards between residential and non-residential land uses. This this policy intends to protect neighborhoods from the sensory intrusions of adjacent non-residential uses that may affect the long-term viability of those neighborhoods. And the proposed amendments the land development code will condition and limit the sensory intrusions car wash uses will have on surrounding development, whether it is residential or non-residential in scope. This is often the case that car wash uses locate near to residential areas and are also adjacent to other non-residential developments. So, this uh proposed amendment is consistent with this policy as well. So, uh moving forward then into the existing ordinance, one thing that we ought to consider first is a distinction in the types of uses that we're talking about. So the proposed ordinance um began with a or with a design limitation and regulation associated with freestanding car wash. So car wash itself wasn't really defined in the land development code. We created uh and proposed a new car freestanding car wash definition, an automotive vehicle service that includes a fully automated exterior vehicle car washing. Exterior vehicle washing that uses friction which could include cloth, brushes, or other physical elements or touchless equipment as vehicles move through a washing tunnel fitted with a series of synchronized machines and providing a minimum of three vacuum stations. That minimum of three vacuum stations at the end allows for the distinction between freestanding and what's not freestanding. For example, a gas station with an accessory use car wash. They typically don't have uh vacuum stations.

Certainly, they don't have the the number of vacuum stations that a freestanding car wash use has. Uh there are a series of supporting amendments. Uh before we get into the proposed section 1106, these amendments are sprinkled throughout the land development code, including in chapter 300 where we have a prohibition on the waiver of pre-application or pre-conultation meetings, which is to say that if you're going to do a conditional use uh permit for these uses, you would have to do a preapp. Uh it'll require car washes to have neighborhood meetings. Also, chapter 400 has an alignment uh aligns conditional use requirements rather with the new zoning regulations because there is a a portion of the code that we're going to adjust in chapter 500 which is to make all car washes a conditional use in C1 zoning and all car washes a conditional use in C2 zoning. And then chapter 900. Uh this one's kind of this one was a tack on to this as uh since this project was going to move rather quickly, but it didn't. Uh the tack on was to modify the stacking requirements for drive-through facilities for restaurants. Um it has nothing to do with car washes, obviously. Uh the the intent here was to uh provide a site plan friendly update the land development code in a quick way in order to enable the counting of car stacking from the pickup window of a drive-through restaurant facility and not from the menu board which would often cause the tails of uh drive-through cars go into neighboring properties or out onto the front of finally uh we created the definition which I show at the very beginning. So, going into the actual ordinance, I'm not going to go through all of the text um that's on the the screen and read everything, but if you recall the C1 and C2 will have car washes as conditional uses. And what section 1106.2A 2A is talking about is that in MPUs that have C1 and C2 permitted uses, it'll they'll need so you have MPUDS that often say we want the permitted uses that are outlined in the Uklitian zone C1 and or the Uklidian zone C2 for example. By changing them and moving them in the C1 and C2 zonings from the permitted uses list to the conditional uses list, a lot of these MPUs are no longer going to have access to a use that was previously in the permitted uses list. So, they've been moved out of the way for them. Um, they'll need those MPUs will need a substantial modification to reinsert car wash back into the MPUD. This is in effect the same process uh as having a as requiring a conditional use permit in the uklidian zoning which is basically to review draft the conditions of approval hearings. So it's essentially the same process. Uh, additionally this section is also prohibiting car washes in EC employment center future land use, ILIL industrial light future land use, IH industrial heavy future land use, TC town center future land use. Um, these are all uh future land uses that are reserved for

employment generating uses. And again, car washes typically they tend to have two maybe three jobs associated with them. And then um from a design perspective uh autocentric car washes are not compatible with traditional neighborhood development or transit oriented developments or the compact development areas associated with mixed use strip reduction measures mut from from time to time which are less than autocentric in terms of the design that they're trying to propose. Additionally, the car washes will be prohibited in the connected city northern and southern innovation zones and community hub special planning areas. One car wash use would be allowed per type one villages of um Pasadena Hills village, type one village. Previously, specifically approved car washes in MPDs are exempted uh to section 1106. So all of that's being talked about in 11062A there terms of the applicability. Um this these are the four uh special you might I'm going to use the word exception but the special considerations in terms of applicability all proposed new car washes having approved site plant or approved building permit prior to September 17 which is the target approval date of this ordinance um that uh has not expired shall only be subject to 1106 uh 3D1 and then uh and we'll see what 11063B1 is in just a second. Uh but just to cut to the chase so that you don't wonder too much, it's basically saying that drive lanes and parking spaces shall be clearly delineated. Other words, make sure your paint markings on the ground are uh available for people to navigate your site. Uh all proposed new car washes with a pending site plan application deemed complete for content prior to September 17 should only be subject to that D1 provision I just mentioned. All proposed car washes with a pending building permit submitted prior to the adoption of this ordinance shall be subject to D1. The painting provision I noted and any approved MPD with specific design, location orientation standards for car wash only be subject to the same D1 provision and will not require a substantial modification to the MPU. Uh this uh last portion of the sentence is a qualifier that uh compares against what's happening in 1106.2 which is saying that your use was permitted previously but now is in find it finds itself in the conditional uses section. You have to do a substantial modification because it it it mimics the conditional use process for in an MPU. This uh provision here notes that you don't have to do that if you have an MPU that clearly talks about car washes and clearly talks about um the requirements that that car wash in that MPU will follow. So they don't have to do anything essentially. Uh moving on in terms of um car the car uh one of the big things that happened at the planning commission uh was that the or the local planning

agency required that all car washes should find uh should be subject to the conditional use permit process. Uh this created a little bit of a um an internal problem to the uh proposed ordinance because uh 1106.3 were general design and use standards that were going to be applicable to all car washes at that point because there was no distinction being made by the planning or the local planning agency recommendation. Uh so in attempting to weave the planning development economic growth uh department's proposal with the local planning ay's proposal it was determined that 1106.3 should only be applicable to freestanding car wash facilities which would meet the original intent of the ordinance to regulate that the various impertinances the amount of land area used up by these freestanding car wash facilities on our major corridors and unsightly appearance that they were presenting And so these standards talk about the horizontal design requirement for a freestanding car wash facility. These are not applicable to a use such as a gas station which might have accessory car wash uh with it. Uh moving along in terms of the setbacks again when when the two versions met at the local planning agency what came out was setback requirements that essentially imitate and are exactly the same as the C2 setback requirements for any other commercial use. So the other main thing that uh the proposed ordinance uh requires is that we'll screen all mechanical equipment. So if it's on the roof parabase if it's on the ground somewhere landscaping fencing that sort of thing. Uh importantly there is an allowance for car wash openings to face a rideway after orienting properly. So there's a situation, there's always going to be these types of uh situations where if the freestanding car wash facility, for example, is a corner lot, um which however which way you turn, the building is always going to be facing right away. And so the code does take uh does make allowance for car wash openings to face the right way. There's ways that you can screen it without having to impede access into the tunnel that that the cars will move through. on this uh slide and you can see here our D1 provision. Uh this is the drive lanes and parking spaces shall be clearly delineated making sure your paint paint markings are appropriate. Uh in this provision we're talking about screening vacuums and pumps in in C3 and C4 there and screening from residential areas. Finally here in 1106.4 before we get to additional design standards that are now applicable importantly to all car wash facilities. So these are vertical requirements uh where we seek to avoid blank facades. Make sure that the buildings and the various subordinates match each other. Keep a clean appearance. That's the language that's being presented in uh 11064A and B. Uh these uh design standards would be

applicable to a project like a gas station that has uh an accessory car wash mainly because it doesn't deal with horizontal requirements. It only deals with uh vertical requirements. Make sure you're you you look right. Uh it does not impede these businesses from presenting their brand. uh more of the vertical requirements for the roofs, the various types of materials. There's a lot of um variation opportunity given in terms of the materials that they that can be used to create that visual distinction to avoid blank facants. Uh car wash tunnels uh the interior mechanical equipment of the freestanding car wash tunnel shall not be visible from adjacent rightway. This is a different provision to the one that I mentioned just a few minutes ago that talked about how the openings of the tunnels uh could face the right of way. This is talking about vertical elements. So, making sure that you don't have those glass walls that fog up and create a lot of um visual. Some people don't like that look where everything's just wet and and foggy in the building. So uh this is simply trying to avoid that that view into the mechanical systems of the car launch. And then moving along uh in terms of the chapter 300 which I mentioned at the beginning of the presentation, this is just a language that's requiring pre-lication consultation. Uh neighborhood meetings are required for car washes. As you can see that here at the bottom here's the uh conditional uses list uh that'll be present in the C1 and C2 zoning uh requirements. So one of the things that happened at the local planning agency the initial proposal came forward with a proximity requirement. There was one and a half miles separation between various freestanding car wash facilities. The local planning agency changed it to say all car washes should now be conditional use permits. We because we can better control the proximity issue through a conditional use permit process. That's what the boardman recommended. Uh as part of that discussion, the uh county attorney's office helped to facilitate the establishment of these additional standards that would be built into the conditional use criteria. uh that the planning commission in the future on such a on a car wash proposal for example on board of county commissioners could then assess and discuss how close a proposed car wash is to other types of car washes in the area um and what can be done about it. So just to walk through those really quick because these are kind of new um it happened in the discussion of the local planning agency. So all car wash facilities shall be subject to additional review criteria and standards which may include but not limited to the following. A demonstration by the applicant that there is public need for a car wash at particular location proposed. This can likely be accomplished by a market demand analysis. An inventory of all car washes located within a 5 mile radius of the

proposed location. This to identify the saturation of what's happening. How many car washes are are located within a particular vicinity. you saw the map earlier in the West Market area kind of showed the different um locations of the various car washes across the county. Uh noise limits appropriate to the surrounding land uses. We have noise requirements and the code ordinances, but if something wanted to be a little bit more stringent, we could build that into the conditional use permit. A decommissioning plan was something that was talked about at the local planning agency extensively. What's the plan for when these uses uh expire? when they go out of business and we have a shell of a building that remains. So this is something that could be established as a conditional use permit appropriate of operation which is a typical requirement of many conditional use permits and then of course requirements for enhanced buffering etc uh for the years. All of this can be discussed on a case- by case basis through the conditional use process. Uh these are the require these are the conditional uses themselves uh in the C1 and in the C2 lists coming in as C under C1 and Q under C2 zone. Uh this is the the drive-thru add-on that that took place. So it's illustrating that the stacking spaces are to be counted from the pickup windows, not the menu. And then the definition here at the end. And so with that presentation, I request the board of county commissioners accept uh public comment. No action is required today. There were a number of questions that were submitted by uh interested parties uh as it relates to the car wash ordinance that's being proposed here today. Um those included questions that I tried to answer during the presentation. Um, for example, um, if an if an existing MPUD allows C2 uses, but a developer wants a car wash, he has to do a substantial modification. And basically, the answer to that is if there is an existing MPD that has allowed C1 or C2 permitted uses, it's relying on the Uklitian zoning to identify the permitted uses. If the Uklitian zoning district changes and moves a previously permitted use to a conditional use, the MPVs which reference the permitted uses of these uklidian zones no longer have that. As a result, to access that use, the substantial modification is required to reintroduce it, which essentially is the same thing as a conditional use permit. Anyway, you have to develop the conditions, whether that's in a conditions of approval list or as a conditional use permit list, and then you have to present it to the planning uh commission and also to the for commission. same process. Um others uh were question other questions included uh the differentiation between 1106 2A um which required that substantial modification that I just talked about. Um but if you have a specific design do do you do you need to

still go through that substantial modification? The answer is no. If your MPUD clearly identifies that it allows a car wash and that it says that car wash is going to be positioned in this manner and it's going to allow these types of in and other uh pieces of equipment then they're free and clear of 1106. They don't have to follow that. Um there was a small typo at the end of the presentation which we can fix. Um and then lastly the the other question I answer. So, um, is there any questions? Any questions? Mr. Whitman. Thank you, Chair Terry and David and team. I'm very glad to see movement to our level on this this project. It's, you know, clear that we have car washes all over the county. You've seen my maps. We've seen yours. Now, I want to make sure before the second reading of this that we have all the kinks worked out. There's a lot in this ordinance where I just really my initiative was architectural design standards and some level of of distance requirement. Um, and I think it's important that this board have the ability that we don't box ourselves in that I guess we through conditional use or however Engle step in whenever you'd like that this board has the ability to approve a car wash if it's if it's deemed necessary in the area. And my thought process behind this was say the widening of 301 happens from 56 South and it's six lanes or even 56 for example. I don't want people doing U-turns and cutting across traffic to get to a service station or or whatnot. So, I know instead of boxing ourselves to just one in a mile and a half, but have them to where it's say 41 to 41 is widened from 52 all the way to Hernando for example. Um, so and then thinking about further on a on a decommissioning plan, I I like the idea, but other businesses go out of business. is a Wendy's goes out of business or Checkers goes out of business and they don't have a decommissioning plan. It's kind of apples to apples there or they spraying Roundup, weed eating, mowing the grass, that's kind of a a tricky tricky deal there. If all of a sudden we were doing decommissioning plans for one type of product over another, I I understand it back in '08 when you know market fell out when you had car washes sitting around on 54 um just falling apart looking bad. But there were other businesses too. Um, so I think we still have a little bit of work to do before we we vote on this thing. And I'm hoping that staff can get, you know, you all working together and get with stakeholders, especially the county attorney's office, Mr. Stein Snider, maybe working and coming in at a higher level. That way we can have some, you know, the business kind of thought process going into this ordinance. That way it's it's a good product and we don't have to necessarily undo it later. Um, and also like to see anything that the board has approved previously not be impacted uh uh by this ordinance. I know

there's there's ones that we've approved at um 52 or what's it called now? Okay. Clinton and Prospect and that's used as our example and that group was a fantastic working partner of what if we're going to have a car wash in this county what we want it to to look like and be designed and and and be moving forward and I don't want this ordinance to him up you know their next steps it's I want to make sure that what we have going forward is for the future so I'm very glad of all the work and hours y'all put into it and working with the stakeholders. I'm excited to see uh the finished product here and I know you know all the folks out and about throughout Pasco County are as well. It's we've heard it loud and loud and clear that hey what's up with all these these car washes and looking like pup put golf car courses with sharks and all sorts of funny things. So, you know, glad that we're moving towards a direction to make up our car wash product uh look a little more professional. So, thank you. Uh, Terry, I believe with with stakeholders and all in mind, I think you've answered a lot of those questions prior to now, if I'm not mistaken, far as competition in the workplace. That right on car washes. Oh, you you mean as in terms of Well, I I didn't think you could have a car wash coming in a corner and they have monopoly on all four corners even though they don't own the land. I thought y'all addressed that. Uh it can yes it can be that can be addressed because if we require all car washes to have a conditional use permit right one of the criteria that we discussed um number 10B here in inventory of all car washes located within a 5 mile radius. If the board found that there was car washes on all four corners, for example, Mr. Mariana, uh, I'm a little concerned about Commissioner Wman challenging having putt putt cost golf courses out there. So, you want to challenge the putt putt golf. Is that what you're saying? We got a ways to go to get too many of those. It'll be all right. Uh, uh, and I'm glad you brought up as far as having a six lane highway, having them across the way, cuz that was one of my thoughts, too. Yeah. Having to do two turns. I'm I'm glad we're covering that. I'm glad we're covering intersections because three is probably enough. Um, so they two is probably plenty, but uh I think it's good to look at that. The someone who's put the application, I agree with that, too. Don't affect that. What does concern me a little bit as far as staff getting involved in doing a market analysis whether we need another one? Their business model is pretty much, if you're going to look at what they do, they pretty much go by subscription rates anyway. So whether one's right beside it or not, they don't care. I don't think it's going to help the effect. We want the distance of a mile,

mile and a half, whatever it may be, I think is probably the most important part of this whole thing going through next year design standards, which I like what you're doing there too. Um, I'm I'm more concerned to that than in the market analysis. I think it's would slow down the whole process, uh, not make it good. U, MPUDs, if someone's got C2 zoning and it fits, um, I don't know what type of analysis you're going to do, but I think we should take a close look at that as well. If they're already approved for it, that's kind of like being pre-approved. If it meets our standards, what we're setting for design, I don't know how you keep someone from saying you can't put it in after after MPB's approved. It's in the marketplace. Yeah. Okay. This I I have I have that concern, too. And I think of all the work we did, I see Mr. Alman's here on his on his plan. I don't think Was that an MPU? That was Yeah. And it was specific. Okay. And we we did a lot of specific rules on the layout of that one, but you're saying he'd have to come back through again? No. No. He that project was free and clear because the MP has spec it has identified that it will do a car wash and it has identified specific site design criteria in the MP. I I want to be clear though that there are many MPUDs that I suppose you might say for convenience sake have simply said we will allow all C2 permitted uses and it that's it. That's all it talks about in the MPUD. Well, the MPD is making a reference to the Uklitian zone and essentially piggybacking off what the Uklitian zone has uh in the land development code. So if that list changes there, uh that means that it's no longer accessible to the MPUD in terms of being a permitted use. So that may sound unfair, but it it's like I said previously in the UK zone, it's now a conditional use. So anybody who had C2 before, they're going to have it as a conditional use. So if they want to do that, they're going to come in to the planning commission on the board of county commissioners to make their case for a conditional use permit. If you're on an MPU, you're going to do the same process except it's going to be called a substantial modification, but they're going to come in, they're going to do the same exercise where they develop the conditions of approval, the same kind of conditions of approval you'd build for a conditional use permit, and then make that proposal to the board of county commissioners, say, "We'd like to reinsert a car wash into this MPU with these uh conditions of approval." And that's basically the same process as a conditional use permit. Okay. Okay. And I have one more question. One more. Um the Did you say there has to be a

neighborhood meeting? Yes. Is that part of what we require now on conditional use? Yes. For conditional use. Because that seems very weird to me because you don't have a neighborhood meeting for McDonald's or a bank or specifically for the car wash use. As I pointed out here, it'll be required. I shouldn't say for all conditional use permits, but specifically for the neighborhood meeting. All conditional use privates must do a pre-application meeting no matter what. But for neighborhood meeting, certain types of uses like car wash are um going to be required to have Why? Um that's sounds just like discriminatory. I I feel bad for the car wash people. Well, is that my neighborhood? Is that stemming from the one that's in Seven Oaks? Is that the kind of the reason why we're all a sudden the car wash popped up in Seven Oaks in business park? In the business park where inside Seven Oaks? It's on uh I'm not sure the west side of Bruce Downs in Seven Oaks. Yeah. Okay. Well, Bruce Down's a big road. Yeah. You ought to go see it. All right. I I I'm not sure if it's going to I guess it won't show up on here yet. Yeah, it probably will. So So Terry, Mr. Chairman. Yes. So Terry, so the project that's approved that the board approved however long ago at Prospect and Clinton. Yes. this these terms and they were the catalyst for how we got worked on all these architectural design standards and we're fortunate to have a partner with you know Circle Cable and work with us and go through renderings and all the examples. They're set to close and move forward and they would not be impacted on on what we have reading here today. Yes, that's the intent of the language. Scroll back here. Uh here at the end, a new car wash. A new car wash. I'm sorry. Well, it works in combination. So, a new car wash to be located within one of these prohibited uh areas receiving specific approval as a use in an MPD approved by the board prior to the adoption of this section shall not be prohibited. That car wash was in a BOP village. That's why it's included there in the in the prohibited areas. And then the next Well, we have two of those, but this board already approved. Yeah. What? That's They'll be okay. They'll be okay there. And then this one here, uh, any approved MP, so this one's the all-enccapsulating countywide provision. Any approved MPU with specific design, location, site orientation standards for car washes shall only be subject to section the painting on the ground and will not require substantial modification.

Otherwise, they don't have to come in for for anything. So, why am I why are we hearing concern from votes that have already been passed? I mean, I we tried to make it as clear as possible so that they wouldn't have to. I just looking to go forward here and, you know, have good product going forward, but you know, this board's made binding decisions, so it's going into getting better in the future. And I just hate to see It's my initiative, but I hate to see something we're working on have negative impact on something that we shouldn't have to be even worried about today. That's right. So again, that that one at Prospect and Clinton is in the clear as it relates to this. Okay. Thank you, Chairman. All right. Um, so there's no action date, but this is a public hearing and I believe we have someone signed up to speak. We don't have anyone signed up per se, but we have one online, but I believe Mr. Jav is here. Mr. Hobby wants to speak to the sign up. Uh, Mr. Chairman, Clark Hobby, J Hobby and Hobby, PA 109 North Brush Street, Tampa, Florida Advent. Uh, I I do not have any philosophical objection to limiting car washes. I don't have any problem with uh, you know, requiring conditional use permit and C2. Uh the board does need to be aware that there are a lot of people that adopted C2 standards in their MPUDS. They probably thought they were going to have car washes as a potential use and those are going to go away now. But my the reason why I'm speaking today is I'm hoping that we can sit down with your staff. David Engel and his staff have worked very hard on this and the county attorneys have have worked on this hard, but there hasn't been a lot of meeting together with the stakeholders and there's some language issues with this uh draft that we received last week that are still really problematic. That's one example of it. If you look at B4, it says if you have an approved MPUD with a specific design, location or site orientation standards, you do not will not require a substantial modification to the MPU. Not a modification to the MPU. We have an approved MPU. I don't want to do any modification. It just will say not require a modification. And some of the language in the previous paragraph is also inconsistent with that. So, I know uh Miss Wilhight and I would like to sit down and Cynthia Spyel with the county attorney's office and with staff just to work through the the finer points of the language. But I'm representing the seller and the one site over in Prospect and McCabe and I worked on the other MPU on the other side that both have site design requirements and I've got to be very clear that those are still allowed and that we're not having to change our MPU. Um that's just very important and Cynthia and I both worked on the one that involves Mr. Alman and his partners

and you know it would be a shame if we're at this point if that language was construed to mean that we have to modify our MPU before we could proceed. So anyway I appreciate your help. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Yes. So Clark. Yes. So even going through the conditional use would be part of a modification for an MPU. Well, that that's a raising a different issue. In the previous paragraph, I I I would say to the board, instead of requiring when someone has C2, but they don't have specific design standards, you could simply require a conditional use permit be obtained from the board, which has to go through all the hearings, a conditional use permit's a lot easier to get done than a substantial modification to the MPU. the filing fees, the reports, and all that stuff are exponentially more difficult. So, that's one of the things we discussed with staff. But like I said, that this is more getting into legal ease and the language not doing what I don't think the county even intends that it's doing. Well, those are my thoughts, too. By going to the substantial modification or any modification, it would entitle probably cost a lot more money compared to just a condition. Oh, for sure. There's no question about that. So I think that's we should be looking to go that way. Barbara Willilh height 60 Barbara Duda Will height oh I don't know Barbara Willil height 6327 Graham Boulevard Newport Richie 34652 this has been a long journey we've been side by side with your staff Clark and I and Cynthia Spidell we understand your intent we just have to make sure the language is reasonable and works and we'll continue um staff has said they would sit down with us and we actually offered I said look I'll sit down with you let's get in a room let's pull it up on the screen and let's fix some of these language issues we've seen a bunch of them um between Clark and self. I would say that I was surprised when I got back from my honeymoon that planning commission had pulled in all car washes. Do we really want to do that? You all were really clear about standalones, freestanding, but now we have the 7-Elevens and their accessory car washes. So now we're talking about every convenience store that wants to have a gas station, excuse me, a car wash. Now we're pulling them into this as well. And do those people even know that that you know, we've talked about it's been in the press. I don't really feel sorry for the freestanding ones because it's been in the press for a really long time that this is something you were working on, but I imagine there's people that have been working on like a 7-Eleven with a with a um car wash that have no idea that this is going on. We're pulling them in. So, I just kind of want to point that out. I was really surprised by that because that pulls in a whole another group of folks. Um so, the other thing and then that's

amplified by the fact that you have some really strong prohibitions here in connected city and in VOP. He says you can have one. Well, there's a whole bunch of places in connected city. I guess you'll have to just drive somewhere else. You know, drive somewhere else when connected city to wash your car. But if you look at in in villages of Pasadena Hills, you can have one per village. Okay. So, now is that one standalone or is that one just regular 7-Eleven with a car accessory car wash? So perhaps if you guys could kind of weigh in on that and give some direction because those it seems like there's going to be a lot of unintended consequences with those strict prohibitions when they the what you're moving towards is a conditional use. So you can hear these, but some of those you won't be able to hear if you have this kind of language that's this strict in here. And how you going to decide who's the first one, who gets to be the first one, that's a whole another can of worms. the neighborhood meeting. I have done a ton of neighborhood meetings in all my years and requiring that to be mandatory in every case just stirs people up. Um, very difficult to do neighborhood meetings because people can't have their questions asked because you have people that feel strongly, people that just want to get questions asked. It's not a very good vehicle. So, your staff already has discretion if there's a use that people are caring about. They want to participate. Neighbors want to participate when they get their notice. Staff says go to a neighbors meeting. You go do one or you just meet with the people that have shown interest and have questions. So, I think we're just going to make this a very, very, very difficult process. Clark and I do make our living off of process. So, we're actually standing up here saying, are you sure? Because we make our living off of process. So, just kind of think about that. Um, again, we want to come up with something that's workable and reasonable. And, you know, all this is is time on your staff as well. We have a lot of different things. That was all I wanted to kind of point out. Talk about how we the cell tower ordinance. So yes. So there's I was was paying attention to planning commission when I got back. I did listen and I guess there's the thought the decommissioning plan. What I can hear what what planning commission is saying is in the cell tower ordinance there's a very spec there's very specific language that says if that cell tower is not used for six months it has to come down or the county can bring it you know bring it down and then lean the property. So I think that's what planning commission was saying um if I channeling what planning commission was saying in their recommendation. I'm not sure the language is reflected here, but there is specific language if that's something you wanted to do. Um, or you if you're you're coming down

going down a conditional use route, I guess I suppose you could condition them. We do need to work on the way the condition conditional use standards, you know, may including but not limited to. It's not really a standard. So, I talked to David. He said we'll work on that. Um, but that's the thought. It's not my thought. I'm just telling you what planning commission was thinking that perhaps that would self-regulate people to make sure that there wasn't a proliferation of where they shouldn't be. But I'm not sure that that's I mean I know that's a perception that people think people aren't going into these businesses with these big investments and and making those decisions wisely. So that's my input. Happy to work with your staff get this over the the goal line. Thank you. Glad to see you next time you come learn your last name. We'll be okay. That's we did not have any one else signed up. Okay. Is anyone online to this item? Anyone? Seeing no one online. Um, Miss Spidel, Cynthia Spidel, Miss There you go. Okay. Thanks, Dad. um check concerns we were and I'm here representing um the circle aspect in Clinton Avenue that everybody's been kind of referencing though obviously I just wanted to make sure we got on record that we support the um use exemption and 106.2A 2A that allows we used to continue in the type 2 village because we are a type two village and that only um a woman 06.3. D1 standard for the driveway markings but that would be the only additional standard that would apply um and it would not require any modification to sort of um echo's point that it's insubstantial. Uh it should be any modification. So that covers pay. We want to just thank everybody for working with us and um allowing that exemption to be clear. Um there's just two clear items that I wanted to bring to your attention and that was um the fact that no alternative standards would be allowed. So I just think that some like in our case and just having gone through this experience there were a lot of engineering standards that required placement of certain things in certain areas. So I think that it's a mistake to not allow any alternative in any circumstance. I think that was a little typo that Terry mentioned. So that covers that and in um for public I think it would be really hard to establish public need and be above public. I don't think the county should be in the business of competition is good for price. Um it's good for the citizens of county. And with that I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment. [Music] Thank you ma'am. Um, madame vice chair, we uh the clerk's office wants to make note uh that there is a exarty communication notification has been filed in this matter on behalf

of Commissioner Wakeman. Okay. And um does staff want to come back up or we you want to answer any questions or comments that we need? Um, Victoria Pito's planning development, economic growth. Uh, I don't have any further questions. We'll be happy to work with the stakeholders that just spoke. Uh, and I think we're very close uh to a final version. Yeah. Okay. Well, uh, Commissioner Mariana. Yeah. Just one one question, Terry. As far as gas stations go, I think the type of gas station that has it built right beside their building, etc., there's not a complete waste of space has efficiencies to it. I'm not looking to put those into this whole protection. I don't know if the rest of the board feel the same way that I don't I don't have an opinion one way or another on those as far as location mile and a half. If they can fit, they can go to me. I don't have a problem. Yeah. Yeah. Same. Are you saying I'm sorry, Commissioner, just to clarify, are you saying that the gas stations with ancillary or accessory car wash shouldn't have to meet a proximity requirement? Wait, which kind? Because like comm uh Mr. Alman's had is a gas station with a full car wash thing. I'm talking about the se the ones separate from that just have a little let's say their gas station pumps are on one side then off to the side they have the building connected to the building. They have a single standalone one stall drive through and be done. Is there a way to dis descript? Those are the so-called accessory car wash. Okay. So that's So they're not included. So they're not Well, in the current draft, we have included them, but is it the board's desire not to consider them at all? Um I mean, you can make them look good if there's some standards you're going to put in, but I'm not looking to like put them into the uh distance things uh distance numbers we're talking about. I Okay. Well, we don't have a proximity requirement right now. It's just a a straight up conditional use permit for for every for all the uses. Okay. The other thing also um about uh holding a public meeting, I don't know. I just think that like Commissioner Surfi said, other businesses don't have to do that. So, I don't really think that's fair. I don't know what you guys think, but agree. Okay. I think it depends on where you put them. You know, when one popped up in Seven Oaks, that cost that that surprised a lot of folks uh that one could go where it did. Um but again, the board will have discretion, right? So, yeah, we'll we'll take them. We'll take them as they come.

Yeah, Mr. Chairman, remember it's one or two jobs per that's the Yeah. When you look at jobs per square foot, that's that's what gets me, right? But from what might be different the conditional use it is a public hearing so a town hall meeting but it will be a public public will get a chance to voice their opinion on it. Yeah. Yes. That's true for and a lot less cost than the monthification process. You have something to Well just to clarify Commissioner Jerger and Commissioner Strike commented on the requirement for neighborhood meetings. Right. Okay. Just Yeah. So, I think Terry, I think if I can summarize, I think the comment is since you're going to have a full-blown public hearing on that item, they don't they don't necessarily think a neighborhood meeting is necessary. Got it. Yeah. Very good. That's why he's an attorney. All right, guys. Okay. All right. We'll move on to P52 and another item is no action but it is public hearing. So So on that last one, when when is the next public hearing for the car wash ordinance? We are looking at adoption September 17, 2024 in Newport Richie at 1:30 p.m. September what? 17th. Yeah. Your next meeting in Newport. Oh, okay. Uh, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, on this item, I believe we have an issue. Yes. Um, okay. So, uh, P-52 is an ordinance that would essentially expand the boundaries of the Northeast Rural Production Area, um, overlay district, I should say. However, the advertisement was misdated and as a result, we're the planning development economic growth department is going to request a continuence the October 8, 2024 BCC meeting here at Date City at 1:30 p.m. Move to continue time. Second. Got a motion and a second for uh continuous to October 8th. I'll second. Yes, sir. Okay. Yep. And all those in favor say I. I. Motion pass 5. Okay. Move on to B53. We approve the publication of the hearing of this matter in the Tampa Bay Times, July 24th, 2024. [Applause] Item P53 is DRD240209 uh which is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pas County Land Development

Code section 9052E landscaping and buffering landscape acceptance, maintenance and prohibitions, appendex A definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for separability inclusion into the land development code in an effective date. Uh this comes with a recommendation to accept public comment and adopt the proposed ordinance amendment uh by roll call vote and authorize the chairman to execute it. And there's a presentation if necessary. Okay. your presentation. Good afternoon. Uh Brad Tippen, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Uh this was presented previously. Uh did you want to see the full presentation again? I know we've met with each of you individually or did you just want to speak to some specific questions? wanted to hear that or you got certain questions. I know I know we've got a long agenda today. There's still a lot on there and we got a 5:15. So, I'd like to hear the presentation cuz some of my objections they just changed and just put them into one phrase. You going to open up that door? I'm going to Okay. Two Cokes. So, this is uh what we refer to as the invasive vegetation ordinance. uh we met with several different groups of stakeholders uh in different forums uh including horizontal roundta uh and internal and other external stakeholders. I assume that's not what you want the question. So there there are actually a number of of references to invasive species. Um I know there was a question about this last time. uh in in the the current comprehensive plan and current land development code, there are a total of 18 different references to invasive species. So, one of the things that we did when we went through here was to make sure that what we were putting forth today in this one is not inconsistent with any of those others. Uh the majority of those others simply reference that you can't plan invasive species. This is the one that that generally has uh the it's the larger paragraph that kind of goes into a little bit of explanation. So this all stemmed out of concerns with Kogan grass. Um however, our ordinance doesn't specifically address Kogan grass alone. It it addresses invasive species. Uh we had to do it that way because that is actually what's consistent with the the state and federal legislator uh that the different laws that are out there currently, the different regulations that are out there uh all tie back into people that are developing property cannot go and plant bring put forth invasive species into the land. That's essentially what the goal of all this all of this was. Um, our original code was very short, very succinct, um,

and did not really go into a lot of explanation and did not provide any benefit or assistance to somebody that may want to actually try to figure this out, do this on their own. Uh, there was no quick reference point that uh, anybody could point to and say, "Hey, just look at this section of code. It's there." Or, "Look at this manual. It's there." Uh so we added that and included that language in the ordinance itself to reference exactly where these these folks can go to find that information. Uh we heard the board uh the board was very specific uh about wanting us to directly reference the FISK list instead of using the the kind of somewhat awkward chain uh that exists from the Florida administrative code through through the agricultural department through UF to FISK. So we did that. made that change. So that's what you see here as well. Uh we also changed the uh def well we added a new definition for invasive species to make sure that that was consistent with all the other uses. We since you saw this previously, we shifted the the paragraph related to Kogan grass down and created a separate paragraph just for that. Uh because that one does have very specific for administrative code about how it is to be uh removed and and destroyed basically. Uh so we referenced that piece separately from the other pieces that we had on the invasive pieces. That's generally it. Is there a specific question to Mr. Chairman? Go ahead. So why would you have to take Kogan grass but not the other things? I'm sorry. To why would you separate the Kogan grass compared to the other invasive species? Be because of the extreme invasiveness of Kovan grass. There is a very specific uh Florida administrative code as to how it is to be destroyed, how it is to be it involves transportation and other things with the the code grass. So uh that won't be referenced specifically. The other invasive species simply say uh you you can't do it. Don't plant invasive species. Uh so that's why we didn't go into as much detail on those. We reference the list and that list does change periodically. So I'm a little confused because if you can't plant them, we all agree and that's that nothing's changing there. Correct. But as far as having to highlight the removal of Kogan grass compared to let's say Brazilian peppers, why would you highlight out Brazilian peppers? Why would we not? Why would Yeah. Why would you not? Because there's a specific process Brazilian pepper as well. Why would you highlight why would you highlight that too? So, we do have a we do have references to all the best management practices for removal and and destruction of those all of the different invasive species that are the key ones like that. Uh the again coconut grass is is very detailed in the Florida administrative code. I don't know that pepper has that level of detail in it. Uh but there are different means and and

depending on what combination of invasive species you have on your property, there may be a better way to do it. uh when you look at collectively over a site, it may have several different types. Uh so we didn't want to call everything out and then have one conflict with another and exclude a way to do something. Okay. And I do like the extra extra code protection by not being able to sell it with hay, etc. So good addition there. Okay. You know, this is our first step into dealing with this. I think in the future there'll be some more discussions. I think staff has gathered some ordinances from other counties and we'll in a in a more of a workshop setting we can look at it and see you know how what we want to do but we we have to get the coke and grass under control because people are selling it as sod as we speak. It's a good addition. Yeah. Okay. [Music] All right. Any other questions? Do we need board action? Public hearing today is a board public hearing public hearing. So we have anyone signed up for this? Jennifer Seini name and address and if you've been Thank you. Uh Jennifer Sini 25605 Apple Blossom Lane Wesley Chapel. and you've had me sitting here so long I might just sit down again just to be just kidding. I know these things can go on forever. Um, you're going to be pleased with what I have to say about this. I can see in this final version of the amendment that we're basically at the let's stop wait and see how this works stage. I'm okay with that. Um, there are some concerns that I still hold and I will continue to tell you about. I am concerned that we don't call out when we put the best management practices into effect. I would prefer to see that in the ordinance and I would prefer to have it say at site planning stage. Um, but this is not a killer. None of these things are going to kill what you're trying to do. Um again I feel that if you call out one invasive you should call them out all. Um the reason being each one of us has I don't know an air potato hatred or a coen grass hatred or a Brazilian pepper hatred. This is your way of saying in this county these are really important. So I would call out all of them. But again, it's not a showstopper. Um, I still don't see anything that addresses when, how, and for how long follow-up inspections should occur upon discovery and removal of invasives. I truly hope that the much referenced growth management manual actually covers all this. I'm going to have to assume that it does. Thank you for including the category 1 invasive species from the Florida Invasive Species Council. It is based on science and it is reviewed every 2 years which is a very good thing for us because we will have a reliable list that we can look to. Its greatest

service as a list is it it names the baddest of the bad. And basically, if anyone thinks we're only concerned about code and grass the way we've written the ordinance right now, this list will dispel that assumption pretty quickly. Um, bottom line, I'm okay with this amendment. It's more than we have ever done before to address this vicious cycle. Um, it's a really good start. I believe we will begin to meet the challenge of restoring our native environment. And I truly sincerely thank you for caring. Thank you, Jennifer. Thank you. And you know, for me, one of the differences, we're not selling Brazilian pepper and we're not selling air potatoes, but we are literally selling coen grasses saw. So, it's got to stop. Yeah. Okay. That was the only person signed up in advance. All right. So, there's no action, right? No, this is adoption. This is an adoption. Oh, this is an option. Move to approve. Is there any anybody else in the audience that wants to Is anybody in the audience wish to speak to this item? Anyone else? Okay. Seeing no one. Anybody on WebEx? No, sir. No one on Webbacks. Okay. So, it's up to the pleasure of the board. We have a motion. Second. Okay. I got a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. Roll call. Motion. Roll call vote. Yes. District one. Commissioner WG two. I'm sorry. District two, Commissioner Wayne. Smaller land mass, but I'm not trying to give you again. District three, Commissioner Stark. Don't give my area away. I District 4, Commissioner Jagger. Hi. District five, Commissioner Mariana. Hi. District one, Chairman Opel. I. Okay. Motion pass 5. We will move on to public hearings. Could we have the uh procedures? Be happy to, Mr. Chairman, there are two reasonzoning agendas, regular and consent. The staff will present each application to the board of county commissioners if staff or planning commission is recommended approval or if there is no opposition to the application. The application will be considered by the board without further presentation. If staff or planning commission has recommended denial or if there is opposition to the application, the applicant will be given five minutes for

presentation. The opposition will be given three minutes for each individual or five minutes for a group representative and the applicant will be given three minutes for rebuttal. Any individual disagreeing with staff of 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 this 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. Okay. P54 and it's uh been requested for continuence. We approve publication of this matter in the July 24th, 2024 edition of the Tampa Bay Times. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. PTO Planning, Development, Economic Growth. Item P-54 is PDE 247826. This is a zoning amendment. Sun Coast Lakes MPUD. Uh it's a request uh a resoning request from MPUD to an MPUD to allow modification to the previously approved MPUD to reflect memorialize and approve subsequent revisions on 483 and 12 acres. This is a request to continue to a date uncertain. When is the date uncertain? Move to approve the continuence. Move to continue to a date uncertain. Move to continue to a date insert. Second. I got a motion to get a second. Second. Is this roll call or not? No. Not prey. Continue. All those in favor say I. I. I. All oppose like sign. See? None. Uh 50 vote pass. Mr. J. Move on to U P5. And this is the start of our consent items. We approve publication of this item in the July 24th, 2024 edition of the Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Okay. Item P-55 is the zoning amendment Kokalakus West MPUD SR52 Limited Partnership and Jen Holdco LLC. This is a reszoning impression in AC agricultural district to MPD master plan unit development district to allow for the maximum development of 155 single family detached dwelling units 67 single family attached dwelling units 168,799 square ft of commercial support commercial and 125,000 ft of corporate business park/target industry/light industry and associated infrastructure on approximately 177.48 48 acres located

in the central Pasco employment village in central Pasco County. And this comes with a recommendation to approve the conditions and authorize the chairman to execute. There's a presentation if so. Can I I need to see some of this? I need to see the map because I Mr. Kabala, did you get the answers to my questions? I think we can talk through the the easements and those things. Is that what you your your mic's not on mic? Oh, it's on. There it goes. Yeah. No, I think Well, just go ahead and give the presentation and go through the the various easements. So, the presentation will be by Mr. William Vermillion, senior planner. Okay. Good afternoon, William Vermillion, Planning, Development, Economic Growth. This is PDE 247597 Kokalaks West in Pud location map roughly in the county just south of State Road 52 in the central Pasco deployment village. This is a resoning from agriculture to master planning development uh to allow for that maximum development of 155 single family detached 67 single family attached 168,000 support commercial and 125,000 ft of corporate business part target industry and light industry on approximately 177.48 acres just on the south side of state road 52.5 miles west of state road 52 in the brothers intersection. Here's a location map, zoning map reflecting agriculture, and the future land use map reflecting employment center. Here is a contextual map for you showing the entirety of the central Pasco Employment Village. You'll see the Swope MPD, Eagles One and Eagle 2, as well as Palmetto Ridge or 14 just to the north of State Road 52, as well as the Orange Belt Trail that runs along the southern portion of the Central Pasco Employment Village uh on the north side of the Swift Mud property. You'll also see on this map there are two vision roads that uh occur on this property, vision road A and Vision Road S. uh both of these uh portions of which will be constructed uh with a subsequent development agreement submitted by the applicant. Here is the master plan showing both of those vision roads as well as the black arrow to the south which highlights the pedestrian connection to that orange belt trail that that is covered in your agenda packet in condition 19 which specifies that the applicant will connect to the orange belt trail with a 12t multi-use path. You'll see also that the red areas are support commercial, the purple is that light industrial, and the brown is medium density residential. I highlight those colors because specifically this proposal is consistent with the currently approved master plan for the Central Pasco Employment Village. Uh okay. Well, I'm going to stop you right there.

Perfect. Because I see I I'm looking at that map. Go back or go forward. See the where the road is? The interior road is. Yes. Okay. And now go back about three maps. There. Where's the road on that one? Yes. So this uh so mapper that that layer is old. The alignment changed when we approved well when you all approved Eagle 2 to actually bisect up uh in this current alignment. So that is the correct alignment right there. Yes, ma'am. Okay. cuz I was in a meeting and it showed the other alignment um which looked like the road was going right on the trail. So, um Okay, now I interrupted you. So, I feel better about that road and I want to see a road I want to see a section of that road what it looks like. Um but keep going through your presentation. Absolutely. So, as I was previously stating, uh, the proposed master plan is consistent with the Central Pasco Employment Village master plan, which now shows that realignment of Vision Road S that was approved in uh, 2022 corresponding with the light industrial placement, the sport commercial placement. I'm sorry, let me ask you a question on this one. What's that turquoise down there on the bottom of that yellow map on the I don't Is that turquoise? I don't have the key in front of me. Unfortunately, I cut it off. Um, I can pull that out for you cuz I see that it's there and then I see that that it's green and then I see that it's turquoise. Is that the Swope property? I don't know what that brown one is. Well, okay. So then then the Swope So the the Swope property does go under this property to the south along the Orange Belt Trail. You can't see here, but if I was to zoom in and this was on mapper, I don't know if Eric, you can pull that off. All right. Can you go back to that other map? The one with all the colors. Not that this one. There you got turquoise there. So, I need to know what that is. Then you've got this green thing. And then you have turquoise, but I see in the purple there is no turquoise. So, what's going on there? Is is that turquoise an easement? Who can show me what that is? And where's the easement in the purple? This is what I've been trying to get answer from staff for about 10 days now. Perfect. I can uh I can pull that out for you. I just cut off the key. Do you want me to continue or do you want me to But someone I before I vote on anything, I need to know. I just want to know what's going on. Okay, perfect. Could that be swiftly on that purple? No. No. So, I know the the per the purple for sure is that light industrial that I was

speaking to. I'm not sure off the top of my head the turquoise or the green. I know. I just want to know why that tur that turquoise stripe is not continuing and that's I know it's I know it's not got nothing to do with uh Kokalakus, but I'm just talking to my planners about what the heck is going on. Absolutely. I think it's a good question. Okay. So there is one variation associated with this MPD from 91611 uh to not provide a vehicular connection to the south. As previously mentioned, that's where the orange belt trail is. So vehicular access uh wouldn't really be feasible, but they are going to provide that pedestrian connection. And with that, that comes to you with the recommendation of approval with conditions from planning, development, and economic growth as well as the planning commission. Okay. So I need to know what those colors are. Absolutely. Sorry guys for indulging me, but I think we have a problem. Not on this one, but Mr. Chairman, I'm I take public comment while you're waiting. Yes. Okay. Is anyone here to speak? Do we have anyone signed up? No one signed up. This would be again for consideration. This is a consent item, so wouldn't necessarily be anybody signed up. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this item? Seeing no one, we have no public comment because no one signed up for it. It's a consent item. Do you want to pull it off of consent and do the Well, there's only one other consent item. I got one more consent item. Well, it's off the consent because I'm asking questions. Oh, yes. That's normal. Hi. uh the Brad Tippen Planning Development Economic Growth. Uh the when the project next door came in and the the actual trail alignment was not fully confirmed yet, we had the Tampa Bay Water easement that was along the south side of the boundary of CPEV, which I believe is that blue piece you're talking about. And right next to it from the MPUD that was there, we've got another sliver so that that could be wide enough if we needed to use it. and it would allow the trail to come in and cut down to that road if that was necessary in the future because we didn't know the alignment at the time. Okay. So, can you put that map back up that shows the turquoise stripes there? Um, so why is that not being shown on the property to the east that strip? Cuz I know we worked on that easement with Mr. what's his name and I had to get a letter from St. Pete. I'm just curious. I just want to be sure it's there. Yeah, I can't speak to that with this particular one. Just for the one the

that it's next to absolutely all right. Perfect. William Vermillion Planning Development Economic Growth. So on the original map that's shown as um swift mud preservation, that turquoise color just to to circle back to where we were. the the reason that the the easement isn't shown on this map because in the original like you said that uh that vision road s ran along there which took up that space. Once they moved it uh they didn't put that back on the central pasco employment village master plan per se but the easement was granted to the county through the conditions of approval and then subsequently was sent to the county attorney's office. Okay. And um my understanding is we had one year to comment on either a 60oot or a 30 foot. Correct. And what did we say we wanted or did we comment at all? I'm guessing we didn't because we don't have a trailers. But so so what do we have? What was the comment? It was some someone told me in the conditions of approval, we had one year to say if we wanted a 60ft easement or a 30-foot easement. And a 30-foot easement was determined by the former county engineers staff. Oh, great. To be acceptable. What a surprise. Um, and that was presented to the county by Mr. South. Okay. Because in my last meeting with Mr. Ern and the the uh the trans the transportation plan are working on this. That's her title. Um they said it went away, so I just wanted to be sure it was still there. Yeah. So, good good afternoon. Yeah. Nick, you're county engineer. Um Commissioner, you're absolutely correct. There was an obligation of the property owner to the east to either convey to us a 30- foot wide easement or to sell to us a 60 foot wide strip of land for a half a million dollars with the choice being the counties as to whether we wanted to buy the land or accept an easement. We chose to accept an easement. Okay. So, we still have the easement was not yet recorded. There was concern over some fencing issues at the time when the easement was presented for board approval. It is my understanding from our facilities department head that those issues have been resolved and that easement is coming back to you at the um we're targeting the first meeting in October so that that easement can be reported along that property. Thank you very much. I'm glad very so happy to have Okay. Okay. So, um, if there was no comment from anybody, nobody move for Oh. Oh, okay. I have one more question. I'm sorry. Um, do we want to use this? I guess it's to us. I don't know where to staff. Um, do we want the de those those who are developing near her to build their

portion of the trail or use put their mobility fee credits towards that trail so we're not having to ask people like Representative Steel over there to fund it? Why Why are we not making it part of the condition? I don't know, but take it easy on it. It just won't be. kind of I'm just saying I think we should be we should be having them build it. It's an asset to their development and um you know otherwise we got to go hunting for the money. It's fenced right both sides. What? It's not just wide open for people to walk straight out to it. Is it or is it fenced? It's fenced on the south because that's the Shraider's um property and their swiftland property there. expense only. We're north of there. We're north of there. All right. I mean, the the short answer is playing development economic growth. The short answer is that yes, we can have developers build their segments of the orange belt trail in this case and it can be done for mobility fee credits on the bike ped portion of the fee from the bike portion. I think we should be doing that. I agree. Thank you. Okay. So, we want we want them to be doing that. Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chair, I just want to interject briefly as an engineering perspective to that question. We do wrestle with the question of should we have developers construct a portion of a pedestrian facility adjacent to their frontage. The challenge we have is that a lot of times what they're doing is conveying right ofway to the ultimate footprint in our comp plan and then constructing a pathway with it with a vertical elevation that has not yet been established for the adjacent parcels. So when we have them build a piece of it, we aren't sure at what height that piece should be so that it can be harmonized and compatible with the adjacent properties. Which is why in some cases it's actually preferable to have them give us the mobility fees as a cash payment and then let us go in and construct a continuous facility from meaningful termini so that we can work out the design issues and provide connectivity to major destinations at the same time. Okay. Then what I'd like you to do is if that's the way you want to play this here, be collecting those fees in a pot that said that it goes to their property and when you when the one when they come in then you build it. Then when you have all of them developing, we pay for it. We get it done and you have the money. This particular case, I mean we we are budgeting money and funds for for the trail. you if you restrict them. Right now you your mobility fees are restricted by zones. So that gives engineering services flexibility to execute the capital program where it's

needed. If you want to start handcuffing that program, you you can. Um but I mean we're using a combination of funds, I believe, for the Orange Trail to include penny for Pasco funds. I I I think in this in this case, while it's well-intentioned, Mr. Urin's discussion of it's it's not designed yet. So to have them build it, it makes sense. Let's use those PE and mobility fee credits elsewhere in those mobility fee zones where we might actually need the projects be my recommendation. They're small relative to to your your transportation capacity mobility fees. Okay. [Music] Just don't tell her that there's no money when Yeah, that's what you're going to tell me. There's no money that the one that's I I know where the The beginning part of the orange belt is being is the sunrail is coming from the state with sunrail money and it we fought hard and it took a long time to get that money. Pleasers of the board, we've got about 40 minutes before this meeting's over. We have to start a new meeting. All right, that's a discussion for another day, I guess. Uh move to approve. Second. Got a motion. Second. Is this roll call? No, you're in the you're in the street vote section of the agenda right now. Yep. All those in favor say I. I. Motion pass 5-0. Move on to P56. This item was originally published in the Tampa Bay Times June 26th of 2024 and continued from the August 6th, 2024 meeting to today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Meios PTO's planning development economic growth. Item P56 is PE 247808. This is the is a zoning amendment. Dave Mitchell's Holding Company, Mitchell Clinton Reszoning. It's a change in zoning from an R1 MH single family mobile home district and C2 general commercial district to a C2 general commercial district in East Central Pasco County on the northeast corner of Circle B Road in Clinton Avenue on approximately 2.18 acres. Uh this comes to you with a recommendation to adopt the zoning amendment. Also, there was an exparte form submitted for Commissioner Starky on this project. Okay. I have one question. Um is there a metal building sitting on this site right here? Leman Divine. Um yes, there's currently a building on the site. the um property received a um site plan approval and um a building permit to build that building um within the portion that's already C2. Um so this is coming through with a cleanup zoning to reszone the back half. So it's all one zoning district. Oh, because it was circle V, it was C2. I got you. Okay. Got all right. Is there anyone here to uh uh speak to this item as a consent item? Anyone in audience to speak to it? Seeing no one.

I move for approval. Second. Got a motion. Second. All those in favor say I. I. Motion pass 50. On to our P57 and our last item of the day, I think. Yes, last item of the day. Um P-57 originally published in the May 22nd, 2024 edition of the Tampa Bay Times and by supplemented by affidavit of certified mailings and psych postings and then continued from the July 9th board meeting to August 6th where it was continued to today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes. This item is PDE 247683. This is a zoning amendment uh for Crossways MPUD Crossways 301 by Crossways 301 LLC. It's a resoning request from an AC agricultural zoning district to an MPUD master plan unit development district to allow for the development of up to 40 single family detached dwelling units and associated infrastructure on approximately 29.5 acres located in East Pasco directly east of Old Lakeland Highway approximately 2 2 miles east and.1 mile north of US Highway 98. The applicant uh in the run-up to this meeting has requested the item has requested a continuence for this item to the October 8th 2024 of county commissioners meeting here in date city at 1:30 p.m. Move to continue time second. Where is this location here before we get a This is the one on the other side of 301. It's 301. Mr. Chairman, I believe this is the one we looked at last month. Huh? Yeah. Yeah. This P57, Brad. I think we looked at this last month and we continue through this meeting. That's right. It's just west of 98 or just north of 98 on the west side of the road. Chairman. Oh, this was that the one uh they wanted 40 either 40 near Clinton and 301. This one wanted more density than you won, right? With the Oh, that's well that that looks different to me. I knew that product. Okay. So, what is the pleasure of war? What's the What's the deal? We continue. I made a motion to continue. You're going to probably have to ask Republican input anyway. Okay, I'm good. So, the motion I made a motion to continue time October 8th. H move to continue time certain October 8th 1:30. Okay. And I have a motion for that. Second. Okay. All right. Got a motion and second. All in favor? This was shown as an approval. You might

want to ask if there's anybody in the audience who wishes Okay. Does anybody else wish to speak to this item? Seeing no one, anybody on WebEx? No, sir. Okay. All right. I got a motion in a second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Motion pass 5. That is the last item we had on today. And then Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Could I bring up an item that was talked about in public comment um about political science? Let me I have one thing I need to do before we do that and I'll let you and I have something y'all destroy but what's the las uh Dr. Christine Hankerson ma'am when you come forward I'm going to let you speak I don't know who's telling you the wrong thing but public comments usually 13 Dr. Hankerson and could have your name and address for the record. My name is Christine Hankerson. I live in Meadow Point. Um I imagine you remember speaking to me about a year ago when you were coming to visit our community, which never happened. Uh ongoing problem in our community in Meadow Point. Um, and I spoke to Kurt Browning's office today because I wanted to check to see if our county uh was doing some of the things that were being done in other counties of the state. Uh, putting cameras on the side of school buses to see those that pass when the flag is up. Uh, putting up monitoring systems at the crosswalks uh to show when people are speeding. The last two months of the school year, I witnessed 12 people on County Line Road going through when the red flag was up and children were getting off their buses. Uh we have a little device before San Pine on County Line Road and um just yesterday uh not yesterday, last week um when school was in session, somebody went through and it flashed over 40 miles an hour and the yellow light was on which is a 15 mph school zone. Uh I have witnessed a couple of kids almost being hit when they were in the crosswalk. state put up those nice red flashing lights. Child was in, crossed one part of the road, went into the next one, and he had to jump back with his bike because two cars went around him with the red spot bike. We had two hit at the intermediate school on Mansfield last year. Thankfully, they weren't killed. Although, we know in Wesley Chapel that there's been a child killed with his bike in one of those crosswalks, a hit and gun. So, when I called Kurt Browning's office, they had absolutely no idea what I was talking about about the lights on the buses that record when people go through the various things they put up that they catch theaters and they're finding them over $100. Should be more if we're going that fast in a

school. You have one more. I'll sum up. You have one minute. And um so I was hoping that our county would be as progressive as other counties in the state to prevent our children from getting run over, speeding uh through school zones repeatedly. And also uh it was reported on channel 8 news that in some communities over 600 cars have gone by when the school bus has their flag up. So if any of you have children, pray every day that they make it home because the drivers that we have, we've even seen a police car speed not going anywhere. I called the sheriff's office and they said they would talk to that squad car about speeding in a 35 mph zone before this came up. You had told me commissioner that county has given a lot of money to the sheriff's department and we pay as our CDBs extra money to have offduty policemen monitor our road. Okay. And just the last thing I want to say, the other day I saw a gentleman in a wheelchair, double-edged, he looked like probably a bed. He'd gone into the crosswalk and nobody would stop for him in the crosswalk. So I went out to the end of the street and put my arm up. Are you kidding me? You know, and they just kept going on. Finally, somebody stopped and this poor man in a wheelchair safely got to the other side. There's not everybody looking. And uh we also were told by one of our homeowners in one of our communities that there is a drug house in our neighborhood and they're selling drugs out of their garage. They contacted Pasco Police and said, "Yeah, we know it's there. We're keeping an eye on it." Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chase. You heard all that. Take care of it. So, we appreciate you just uh Mr. Mariana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've got six copies here, one for every board member, including the county attorney and the clerk. Um, it's a copy of the ordinance that the county had passed back in 2011 about signs on during election times for early voting in in around Uh, and then the other one was you saw uh Christine Fitzpatrick give us a copy on the screen she showed us. Um, I want us all to take a look at this because there's a few things that are going on. First, it'll say that your signs that are in the rightway around the county, they cannot be two-sided. They also you can have more than one on any property that's out there. So I will say there's lots of violations going on with that. Now this is completely different from how it's been done for 20 years that I know of. So I don't know how they interpreting are how they interpreting this new or not. Um I want us all to take a look at it and bring it back for conversation next week cuz I would like to get this squared away

before the next election cycle starts ramping up especially as we put signs up. Okay. All right. That's all I have. Mike, I got a couple for you and JP as well. Okay. Um I think chairman so the they're two separate issues. Exactly. The the resolution is for your pro governing your property. Correct. And the sign ordinance is of general applicability to all temporary signs. We do think we may have come up with a solution that we were going to bring back in the glitch. We'll be happy to talk about it on the September because you have the little yard signs that are two-sided, right? But I get I get what you're saying. If they're the big signs by the road that they're one-sided, but those little yard signs, they're they're always doublesided. I think they mean signs like this that are put in a V. Well, that's that that would be two signs. That would be that's two signs. I think that's what they mean. I mean, they mean one sign with two faces. And even if you took the 4x8 and went back to back on the same piece of wood, that'd be a violation. So, but I can tell you staff is addressing the issue and they're going to be taking care of it and bringing it forward to us to take care of. So, I'm sure all of us would like to talk before we have the next commission meeting to with us, Mr. Stein Center. So, appreciate it. Thank you, Miss Starky. Yeah, I um since we have half an hour, I had a few things in my book. I don't have a half hour. We don't start till 5:15. I'm going to take a break. Well, I will too. Um, so in Spokane, which is a military town because they have an Air Force base. My, uh, son-in-law lived there twice. Um, they, uh, they have this wonderful program and at Nico they do a, um, hey, I'm they do, um, the achievement awards. So, everyone there's all different categories and I hope that we win one day. But in the department of personnel management, employment and training category, Spokane did something I think we should copy. Um, Mr. Carbala, they teamed up with the Department of Defense to offer county department internships to US military members, uh, better preparing them for the job force after service and combating county workforce recruitment and and retention issues. And it's a program called Skillbridge. I actually went uh to a military base, I think in Pennsylvania, with a congressman on a tour of workforce training and what the military does. Um, and a lot of people coming out of the military have great skills that can

transition into many of our different departments. And so I think we should look into this skill bridge and see if we can't help our military um get some good jobs when they get get out. Yeah, that sounds good. Uh the second thing is uh something that happened in Was in Clark County. Um Oh, here I have copies for you guys on on that. That's okay. Here, if you pass that down in Clark County, I have this one, too. So, pass this down. Um they adopted an ordinance ordinance making camping under certain conditions misdemeanors. Kind of like what our governor did a little bit here where you can't camp on a sidewalk. But to me, they went a little broader. They said, um, they can't an ordinance making camping under certain conditions misdemeanors, but eligible for community court, which I don't know if we have a community court, um, a special court for people with homelessness related offenses where they can engage with services to have their charges dismissed. It bans camping between 6:30 and 9:30 p.m. on any county road, street, sidewalk, or rideway, any entrance to or exit from any county owned building or parking lot, and any county owned or maintained building and parking lot. And camping in vehicles during that time frame on county property is also banned. Camping on public property will not be allowed within 200 ft of a body of water on land use to operate a public water station, wastewater or storm water facility, which happened near me and they had to shut down the wells because the well got contaminated from them having a you know using that land as a restroom um on the county railroad. We don't have one of those. and then natural areas. And it also bans unlawful storage of personal property in public places between 6:30 and 9:30. I don't know what that means after 9:30. Anyway, I thought this idea of a community court. Um, so, so if we can, you know, get someone who's living on someone else's property into a courtroom and then have services get a hold of them, it could maybe we could help detour some of this and and move people in another direction than just going to move on someone else's property. So, I this was listed as another one of those best practices. So, I wanted to bring it to your attention cuz I drove by that property on 19 again and there there are people living in the back on that property and there's still I have a picture but there's still all that trash right on the front of US19 and because it's public private property we cannot go in and clean him clean it up or kick them out. So, they are up to a $50,000 fine now because the fine increases daily. But you know, if he plans to abandon that property, what is that? That fine is nothing to us until it's leaned and we close on that lean. But in the meantime, we have a major major eyesore on a major road into the county. So rest. Okay, that's it for me. Okay, we're nice. Neither

for a journal.