8.6.24 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

he [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause] [Music] he [Music]

a [Music] [Applause] he [Music] this is I have a mugs but this is a travel mug so it's Char it's charged and it stays hot at what temperature you set it for a long time yeah I my my son got me my first one as a Christmas present and I I I have them all over the place and I get them out as gifts it's the best thing ever so 144° I like my cof that's h i I was going to start [Laughter] it you could but I understand good afternoon we are here and ready to start the public hearing for 1:30 which I'm a minute or two after that and I don't know what happened to my works okay I got it I would like to call call back to order the Pasco County board county commissioner meeting of August 6 2024 please silence all electronic devices and mute your phones we will proceed with uh um public hearing starting um with ordinances and item 52 we're starting and so you'll know ahead of time I am pulling item p63 when we get to that item okay Mr chairman I thought you were going to start with p58 no I didn't make that change so CH you said 63 it's pulling no I'm pulling that item but I'm starting with p52 is that the first item I was just informed by the agenda coordinator that we were moving 58 up front well I think the chairman would have been the one that would have moved it but I didn't I'm just thinking that way I don't know Hospital people here for 58 you have all the hospital people Executives here for 58s okay so on better advice than I had myself we will go to p58 if that person will come forward we will get it taken care of sorry sir that's all right I don't care all right good afternoon Commissioners Paul ralo Support Services item p58 is an ordinance by the board of County commissioners of Pasco County Florida creating a section to be numbered chapter 94 Article 4 establishing a local provider participation fund providing for the authorization of non- abalum special assessments to be imposed levied collected and forced against real property owned or leased by private for-profit and not for-profit hospitals to fund a non-federal share of supplemental payments benefiting hospitals providing Health Care Services to Medicaid Indigent and uninsured members of the Pasco County community providing for the procedure for adopting the annual non-ad valorum special assessments to be deposited into the local provider participation fund providing for the authorized uses for

the local provider participation fund proceeds providing for severability providing for areas embrac providing for inclusion in the code and providing for an effective date and we have proof of publication of hearing of this matter in the Tampa Bay Times July 17th 2024 okay this item comes to you with a recommendation of approval we do have a presentation for you if it is the board's pleasure all right all right we have Colleen erns from atlanto Healthcare Ventures who will be doing the presentation today okay colen might be good for the public to hear what we're doing I think good thing thank you uh my name is Colleen Ern and I'm with otono Healthcare Ventures that is a company that offers technical expertise in the area of accessing reimbursement for care for the Medicaid population and for the Indigent and uninsured in a nutshell our goal in working with the hospitals here in Pasco County and around the State of Florida is to ensure that every citizen has access to Quality Care regardless of income and so we're here today to talk about an opportunity for Pasco County to partner with its hospitals and to work to ensure that the federal tax dollars our citizens are paying here in Pasco and across the State of Florida come back into the State of Florida to facilitate access to care for [Music] everyone so historically Florida's hospitals are limited in the reimbursement they receive when they're providing care to the Medicaid and Indigent population typically when a hospital performs a procedure for someone who qualifies for Medicaid that's an individual who is low income and who has a qualifying disability or condition or is in a qualifying phase of Life hospitals in Florida were only able to get about 60 cents on the dollar in reimbursement for those services so every time that a hospital was providing these Services they were losing 40 cents on the dollar in actual cost so a $110,000 labor and delivery and in Florida one in two births is a Medicaid birth but a $10,000 labor in delivery procedure would result in in the hospital losing $4,000 out of pocket because they were not receiving reimbursement to cover the full cost that problem of course is compounded by the fact that hospitals are only receiving very limited reimbursement for charity care so for the individuals who walk in who are lowincome and do not have any form of insurance hospitals were writing off these costs as Charity Care that amount Statewide resulted in about a $3 billion loss every year so these were limitations on hospitals these were difficulties in November of 2020 Governor DeSantis included in his recommended budget direction for the state's Medicaid agency to seek Federal approval for a program to help address this problem that was known as the directed payment program and the function was to help access federal dollars that Florida had historically

left on the table and to use those dollars to help narrow the reimbursement Gap the dollars follow the patient now of course the issue was was how do you come up with State dollars to bring in the federal dollars how do you come up with the state dollar that qualifies for federal match and the answer to that was looking to local governments to collect from the hospitals only so to Levy a special assessment only on hospitals not on any other business not on any individual citizen but to collect C from the hospitals in the jurisdiction those dollars then serving to unlock federal dollars helping hospitals to narrow that reimbursement Gap so essentially the governmental entities like Pasco County if you choose to proceed would collect these dollars through a special assessment against the hospitals only those dollars come to the county the county submits them to the state and then those dollars qualify for federal match again dollars Florida hit his historically left on the table and then those funds follow the patient so hospitals receive a reimbursement increase getting them closer to 80 cents on the dollar for Medicaid services and taking them into getting some reimbursement for their charity care instead of the historical 1% that most hospitals received it will be about 8% so again not solving the problem entirely by any means but helping hospitals provide this Quality Care uh so Pasco count now has an ordinance before it that would establish this assessment on hospitals only now nobody gets a bill today the hospitals will bring a rate recommendation before this board at a later point but this is the framework creating this assessment uh Pasco is not the first County to have this opportunity in 2021 15 jurisdictions started with this program and they've all come back in fact it's only grown so by the end of this year we could have a total of 26 jurisdictions at the time the slide was created Okaloosa was just considering they've now scheduled September 3rd to be when their vote on the ordinance uh would be decided so 26 jurisdictions doing a program just like this assessing the hospitals helping them access the federal match the hospitals will be before you again September 17th that's when they'll bring the rate recommendation the board will vote on that rate recommendation and if you decide to proceed that's when the hospitals get the bill again those dollars come to the county go to the state unlock Federal match and help the hospitals continue providing this type of care then October 1st is when the county essentially messages yes State of Florida yes State Medicaid agency we in Pasco County want our hospitals to be part of this program we do intend to Levy the special assessment we do intend to help our hospitals access those federal dollars now this program is of significance to the hospitals in Pasco County letters of support were signed by all that would be subject to the assessment and here today in the room we have representatives of bay care and

from Advent Health uh speaking for all of the hospitals in Pasco County we have Mike Merl he is the president and CEO of Zephyr Hills Dade City and conon uh the Advent facilities there Mike if you would mind good afternoon commission good to see you this afternoon commissioner Oakley and the rest of the uh Commissioners it's a pleasure to be here with you this morning and uh as Colleen mentioned my name is Mike murl and I'm a CEO within Advent health and I'm also speaking on behalf of my CEO colleagues within Pasco County Hospital colleagues within Pasco County this afternoon thank you for uh for considering this proposal and I'm speaking on behalf of them in support of the local provider participation fund ordinance that you are considering today this ordinance will allow private hospitals like ours to provide care to those in greatest need by unlocking Federal funding to address our charity and uncompensated Care private hospitals and Health Care Systems across Pasco County provide critical he needed health care services to our local community Florida's growing network of local hospitals special assessments has been a tremendous success generating funds to support hospitals and bould bolster Regional economic impact at no cost to Residents or businesses this funding provides hospitals within Pasco County the ability to meet the growing needs of our underserved community and provide highquality care to patients within Pascal County so again thank you for your support on this matter and we incredibly look forward to working with you together within the County on this critical program thank you are there any questions any questions no well I well I had asked um her if we would we would see anything but no it's just between you and the patients and the FEDS state right that's correct the the dollars are distributed by the state of Florida so after they get the federal match the dollars are distributed by them to the hospitals with with the limitation that they follow the patients they track the volume of care so when Advent health is providing care to Medicaid patients or to lowincome uninsured those dollars are designed to follow those patients so it's designed to incentivize and increase access to care I wish we were doing this earlier so I'm glad it's coming to us yeah thank um I did mention that at the national level I was trying to get the name of the um of what it's called and maybe that County attorney could help me but uh when someone is arrested and they come to our County jail and if they're on federal um medical benefits they're they're um ended and they could be in there for months they could be in there for weeks but their their Federal benefits are ended and so are their families so um at the national level I've been working to fix this and so as the national Sheriff's Association we've managed to fix it to the point where States who susp end those benefits get to have

their get to have them reinstated but States who suspend benefits um know we're not taken care of yet so love for you to take that on too U because it costs us millions and millions of dollars and I think it really adds to recidivism when people who are jailed and aren't getting their medicine um when they get out you know they they go right back be good to get that fixed once and for all okay yes from Mr Mar to with you everybody to get change I think with your say and grou probably get together yeah when it was presented to us we all felt the same way we wanted this to happen and and to tie that Gap together that that hospitals weren't without that money so it's very important for y'all we know that so thank you okay thank you so much thank you so with that do we take a motion hearing public this is a public hearing anyone here wish to speak to this item before we take a vote seeing no one come to approve I got a motion to approve chairman yes just for point of clarification we have provided the clerk's office with a revised effective date for the ordinance that is consistent with excuse me consistent with your board motion um allowing them to file an electronic copy rather than a certified copy excuse me Jeffy if I may also add we also have a Revis release that's also part of your packet today okay uh also I forgot to ask we have anybody on web X that wish to speak or not to speak to this item to this item okay so with that I'll accept a motion I did I did a motion and I think someone second I a second and I'm under discussion that that policy that I was talking about that we're trying to change it's called the Medicaid inmate exclusion policy okay so I have a motion in a second all those in favor call V uh roll call vote uh District Two commissioner Wagman I District three commissioner starkus I District Four commissioner jger I District Five commissioner Mar Al I district one chairman Opa I uh that brings it to a 5 vote and it passes so thank you thank you now we will move back to p52 Mr chairman we have appr the publication of the hearing of this item in the June 5th 2024 edition of the Tampa Bay times thank you Mr chairman narius PTO Planning Development economic growth um I item p52 is peg2 24336 this is the ordinance to create section 1106 Car Wash carash facilities standards is requested recommended continuance to the September 3rd 2024 report County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. here in D City move to continue time certain second got a motion and a second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 move to uh p53 we have proov the publication of this item in the Tampa Bay Times June 5th 2024 and there's no action required on this item that's correct item p53 is peg 24320 this is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners

amending the Pasco County Land Development code amending section 42.2 zoning Amendment mpud master plan unit development submittal requirements section 43.1 preliminary development plans resent IAL submittal requirements section 43.2 preliminary development plans non-residential mixed use submittal requirements section 43.3 preliminary site plans submitt requirements section 43.7 Mass grading submittal requirements section 4043 mining permits application requirements section 44.4 construction and demolition debris disposal facilities operating permits application requirements section 44.6 yard trash processing facilities application requirements section 89.2 cultural resources generally section 89.4 standards for surveys and Analysis section 89.8 historic cemeteries specific requirements and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for superability inclusion into the Land Development code and an effective date this is uh this action require there's no action required on this item for the board of County Commissioners as this is the first of two public hearings second hearing uh will be held on August 21 2024 1:30 p.m. and we can do a presentation if there's a desire okay and there's no action today on this item except is there anyone here that may not be at the next reading of this no no no this is this is your first of two public hearings so yeah so so this is first of two public hearings does anyone here wish to speak to this item today see a no one Mr chairman yes I I wouldn't mind seeing a presentation do what now I wouldn't mind seeing a presentation even if it's brief just to go through it yes I haven't really been briefed on this I um so the proposed amendments the land of alur are for historic and cultural resources this would be land of Amur amendment number 71 um these are the dates on which this has gone through the horizontal round table and on June 20 it went to the local planning agency which found the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and recommended approval to the board of County Commissioners um these are the uh changes that are being proposed to the Land Development code survey shall be consistent with current state cultural resource assessment survey phase one criteria effective as of August 15 2016 and subsequent updates a c created prior to August 15 2016 shall be reviewed by a consultant and recertified if it meets said standards all recommendations made by the consultant shall be implemented by the applicant this is this particular Amendment generated the most conversation at the local planning agency to make sure that uh we got the date correct on the cultural resource assessment survey and what needed to be done once a uh C Phase 1 was in hand uh the rest of the uh amendments uh

are uh less substantive than the initial one it replaces some language uh instead of removing the word ident having the word identify removed and replace with list and or add or or record the information because we don't want to identify on maps or plans where the location of archaeological resources might be might might be and this carries through basically through multiple uh sections of the code again the same language in chapter 800 with the c uh survey it's repetitive throughout the code so all the different code changes are being updated this is the actual code language that's uh proposed within uh the amendments in the packet as I read it in the table and you can see the types of amendments uh that are scattered throughout the code uh fixing certain vocabulary 40 3.2 40 3.3 40 3.7 they all carry very similar uh text amendments and again the same thing in chapter 800 um the Planning Development economic growth Department uh recommends you accept public comment no action is necessary this uh item for today and this will come back to the board again on August 21th you satisfied with that you need more I'm good okay okay all right so is anyone there's no one here to speak today of this item seeing no one coming forward anyone on web X not for this item not for this item okay we'll move from this item to p54 uh we have proof of publication of this item July 10th and July 28th 2024 editions of the Tampa Bay Times and for that last item just for purposes of the record the second hearing is held is to be held on August 21st uh 2024 at 1:30 in Newport Richie okay thank you Mr chairman item p54 is you want now peg 24396 this is an ordinance by the pass County Board of County Commissioners amending the passort County Land Development code providing for amendments to section 132.5 School impact fees to make such section consistent with the 2024 School impact ke study and to adopt such study to increase the amount of school impact fees providing for additional amendments as necessary to ensure internal consistency providing for applicability repealer cability inclusion into the Land Development modification and an effective date uh this is the first hearing of the proposed ordinance before the board of County Commissioners and I'd like to introduce Mr Ray Gad Deputy superintendent of the school board good afternoon Ray Gad deput superintendent of schools 6504 witheral Loop Land lak Florida 34638 uh I don't think there's very many opportunities where we're all together but I want to take a moment to introduce you to our board who's almost all of them are here except one and that's Alison Crumley Cynthia Armstrong y colen bwin Megan Hardley our

chair Allison Crumbley our coach here and we also have our CFO with us Tammy Taylor assistant superintendent Monica is Betsy assistant superintendent yeah Chris Williams our planning director and then also in the back don't hold us against us but we have our consultant with us I'd like to accomplish three things today I'd like to summarize how we got here um then I'd like to turn it over to our consultant if you have any questions and then our board chair would like to make a closing comment if that's okay with the commission um before we conducted this study we brought the builders in for a face- to-face meeting and first thing we asked them is there anything specifically you want us to look at and we had a robust conversation about impact fees you know how those robust conversations go so we spent a couple hours discussing the fees with the builders and frankly I was amazed when we got done with that meeting one of the builders looked at all of us and said you know all of our kids need good schools so we conducted the study after we conducted the the study we held a zoom call with the same group of Builders a few days later they approved the impact fees as we're going to present to you today or as you have in your packet um at their board meeting uh we were recently recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and um it's an incremental increase which I know that you're familiar with I'm guilty at the Planning Commission I was doing our consultant job and telling you all about the study this time I'm going to let our consultant do his job after all we're paying him a lot of money and I invite you to asking tough questions we want to get our money's worth out of you so without further Ado Carson Vice with Tish advice friends like that who needs enemies right welcome uh just uh Ray is a really good friend of mine and it's my pleasure to uh to be in front of you today Mr chairman members of the the commission we have a presentation I'll be respectful of your time and get through it quickly a little bit about us we specialize in Impact fees and fiscal and economic impact analysis we're based in Bethesda Maryland and Boise Idaho and we've done quite a bit of work in the State of Florida particularly as it relates to school impact fees um in terms of the methodology uh we have three components part of this study uh we have the construction of traditional classroom space a land component and also a component for buses uh we took the incremental expansion or consumption based approach which is the standard approach for impact fees it's very formulaic in terms of how it defines levels of service it looks at you what is the average square footage of a classroom or a student seed at the elementary middle and high school levels what does it cost us to build uh additional square foot of space what does it cost us to buy an acre of land

experience than an entire school got okay all right thank you for the presentation any other question thank thank you chair we go to the the housing stock breakdown rates please mean the student generation no the multifam resident single fam and the last one mobile it close to the end the rates or the actual the rates so is there a way to bump multif family and decrease single family and I say that because live local acts looming out there and it'll be there for a while and I I'm kind of of the of the mindset if live local is going to be hanging over our head that we we bump these impact fees for all the multif family product we offet it with the single family I I'm generally I'm going to speak gen generally a big picture of our overall impact fees we keep pushing single family impact fees and increasing them to what they are I'm just goes back to the affordability of the of of the single family home and having family being able to afford a home and the potential erosion of the single family home ownership value that we all I think in this room share that's kind of a a a a tough one there so is there a way to bump the multif family and decrease the single family Mr chairman complicated yes if I think I'll handle this for you yes sir um no Lifeline the answer is no um the the problem is that the law with regard to impact fees and I'll let U Mr Bice elaborate a little bit is that you have to treat all types equally so he's done and in an an analysis he has generated fees based on the impact of what those types of units generate and so you while you could lower them all at the same you know you could you could do 85% of value of of what the study showed you can do 100% then you have the state statute that kicks in but you can't charge multif family more to make up a decrease you want to have in single family it that that will create a challenge point for your impact fee as a whole and uh it would not be my legal advice to do something like that about you're saying we can't is what I'm kind of hearing you advise not to no my you can you'll be challenged you'll lose want there's your choice I mean that that when I say I advise it that means that I don't think that there's a way that we can defend you on it um you can lower them all proportionally but then that's not going to get the school district the amount of money that they have budgeted for their for uh their school construction but you have to when you do that you've got to do them all at the same percentage you can't pick and choose and we can't legally justify higher fees for multif family mobile home the number I mean the study doesn't support Mr chairman yes so one thing that could be a factor though that would you could justify if a apartment complex

comes in and gets a 75% tax break yep you can justify there's a difference of what what the cost is of that project coming in so it may not have happened yet with one but if one does come in I think we should be able to find try to find a trigger for that because it is a risky situation that's out there right now only if the school board is using taxes for construction it it would not you might be able to make that argument but the dollars they are collecting for operations wouldn't be wouldn't be appropriate for impact pce anyway so you'd have to do you have to do a balancing of the construction dollars that their millage is going to agree so can you you figure out how much construction dollars are going toward the schools based upon this it's got to be part of your factor in there know complex that's that would vary on a Case by casee basis as well yeah Mr Gad said he wanted you to earn it today and you've already credited the the capital Improvement millage within the the study itself also or discounted the fee based on that future stre of Revenue I have a question on the multi family okay M AR um the multif family is Apartments Town Homes garden homes town home technically is a single family attached unit so single family incles detached attached unit so town home would be part of that oh interesting yeah so it's duplexes Apartments Condominiums because Condominiums a duplex is multif family but an attached town home which has to D to do with the census definition and whether they share a common wall or not and your ordinance will Define the different types of our towns are pled yeah so um and on on multif family do we distinguish between studio and three-bedroom or is it average out the average the average unit size or the average unit so you take you add up how many three bedrooms there are and how many studios doesn't matter if it's one bedroom or three bedrooms at the same rate for the school well how legally they get away with that because the studio is probably doesn't have any kids where a three bedroom does so legally how do you justify um there is no problem uh legally it's it's more of a you know the courts fall on the reasonableness test and some jurisdictions choose to do impact fees by size of home or number of bedrooms some choose to do the traditional single family versus multif family versus mobile home uh so fees are done both ways just a matter of preference Mr chairman yes so to try to dissect this would be really tough to try to fight it would be even tougher probably take more time in money I think the key would be that we we Unite with the school board to go fight this live local in the future yeah I was just trying to get educated U well I would say that um I think I haven't received one letter one

call from anybody uh in opposition to this um I think we have a great working relationship with our school board unlike some others and um I I like the way that this has broken out in four years and I think you know the work's been done for us and I think we should move for approval second I got a public hearing there's no action today oh no action today no there's action today no there is action but you got to wait okay well the chair wants to speak and then we have public thank you I appreciate it good afternoon as mentioned I am Megan Harding I do serve as the chair of the Pasco County School Board we are very grateful for all the support you've given us in the past and I appreciate you allowing me giving me the time to speak this afternoon this afternoon I wanted to take a few moments and make some comments on the impact fee proposal this increase will assist us in keeping up with the construction cost in our ever growing school district and as you know our county is growing at a very rapid rate so this would assist us in that the impact fees will also allow the school district to balance new school to support New Growth while allowing us to renovate our existing school with Penny funds both of these are equally important the Planning Commission voted unanimously to support this proposal as well and we're very grateful for that the board wanted to take a moment to thank the Tampa Bay Builders Association for their support and strong stance that good schools build good communities we have worked together with the phas and approach over four years so there is not a huge jump all at once again on the behalf of the county on behalf of the Pasco County School Board we appreciate your support so we can Contin to serve our communities and Prov provide the world class education that all our students in our community deserve thanks right thank you and this is a public hearing is anyone else in the audience wish to speak to this item today and there's no action required today on this item this is your first of two public hearings it looks like from I'll have to get Terry or somebody to confirm it looks like your second hearing is on August 21st 2024 or at in Newport Richie at 1:30 or as soon thereafter is Mr chairman yes just a one further point the the key to this is not it's not a tax on people living here it's tax on people coming in so it's making growth pay for itself right it's it's kind of like our we're buying new homes it's on those properties so as we grow okay um anything else from the board no no action is required no one come forward to speak anybody on WebEx to speak to this no sir okay all right so we'll move to item p55 we have approved publication of this item of the hearing of the item at this time in the April 17th 2024 edition of the tampion bay time IEM p55 Naros Planning Development economic growth item p55 is drd2 2436 this was an ordinance to create inv

basic species Management program uh the recommended board action is to withdraw from consideration no further action required wait wait wait is this our invasive yes there's a why is it there's a different ordinance following up on this one you're going to do a different one yes okay and we're going to get done for October well I don't understand why we're withdrawing it not just fixing it I believe that answer is coming forward have new Brad tip and development for you uh yes there are we actually have kind of changed the direction on it so keeping this original going down the path with continuances was going to be confusing further down the road so we didn't want to do that we just withdraw this one and we're bringing the new one for okay and when when will it be in front of the Planning Commission uh I don't know the exact date but it's it's not going to be substantially Delay from what I understand not to not going to be there it's going to Planning Commission I believe tomorrow uh Thursday okay so it's it's still on track okay and you guys hang tough okay Mr chairman yes when when do you expect to show the board the new version uh individual me yeah I think you're going to show the plan coming up I think we should have seen it already but yeah okay I will make sure that we reach out to each one of you to to have those discussions thank you yeah okay all right thank you so this itams withdrawn so ready for p56 okay we have proof of publication on this item uh in the July 10th July 17th July 24th and July 31st editions of the Tampa Bay times thank you Mr chairman ADM p56 is peg2 24400 it is an ordinance establishing The Hope Innovation District pursuing to chapter 190 floa statutes providing for authority and power of the district providing for powers and duties of the district providing for the Board of Supervisors of the district providing for the District budget providing for functions of the district providing for miscellaneous Provisions providing for an effective date uh this comes with a recommendation to adopt the ordinance by R call vote and authorize the chair to execute the original okay and there's a presentation if you'd like okay this is a public hearing is anyone to speak to this item we have one person but I believe they're probably a representative um of um Jonathan Johnson okaycome name and address for the rep Jonathan Johnson 107 West College Avenue tall Florida 32303 with the law firm of qch rock on behalf of the applicant we're just here to answer any questions and appreciate all of your staff's time and assistance to get us to this point Mr Mr Johnson just a question as far as like this CDD coming through one of the things I've tried to work with staff and I know all of us are concerned with and try to get it done is the

connection of sun Lake Boulevard going uh to the South it's not a lot stretch is that part of usd's objective to to fund it or so uh we do have a number of roadway dollars included uh as potential projects in the petition I don't know whether that specific roadway is included or not okay I hope you work with our engineer and get back with us because we do think that's a great traffic reliever so be happy to work with you I think we're building it my beef is we it was built without any sidewalks or any bike multi-use path on the first half of it and probably not the most attractive Bridge I've ever seen I I we definitely want to work with you so that on your half of it we do something a little elevated and I mean in style and substance understood commissioner I'll make sure that we follow up yeah okay any other questions for you no I would move approval it's a c District it's a public hearing public hearing it's public hearing uh is anyone signed up for no sir only Mr Johnson okay uh anyone else audience wish to speak to the item seeing no one anyone on web x no sir okay then public comments closed privileg of the board move approval second got a motion second all those in favor say I roll call vote oh excuse me roll call vote District Two commissioner waitman I District uh three commissioner starer I District Four commissioner Jagger I District Five commissioner Mariana I district one commissioner chairman oi I motion pass 5 Z move on to P57 uh again this item uh appeared in the uh notice of the hearing of the this item appeared in the July 10th July 17th July 24th and July 31st 2024 additions of the Tampa Bay CH item P57 is peg 24412 this is an ordinance establishing the Pasadena Ridge Community Development District pursuing to chapter 190 floorida statutes providing for authority and power of the district providing for powers and duties of the district providing for the Board of Supervisors of the district providing for the District budget providing for functions of the district providing for miscellaneous Visions providing for an effective date this comes to you with a recommendation to adopt the ordinance by roll call vote and there's a presentation so desire well I U Mr chair I have a question go ahead um first some I think I've really seen this map I guess we have some partials in the middle who didn't opt in is that what's going on there yes [Music] so is that a I see that they're separated by this little narrow split is that a road well we'll get the answer in a second yeah it's going to be interesting how they're going to expect those folks to I mean are these going to be private roads in here we we'll let the uh the applicant speak to it

okay good afternoon Jonathan Johnson 107 West College Avenue T Florida qch Rock also on behalf of the applicant so we do have uh four Parcels that are included within the internal boundary uh that we don't own uh nor do we have the owner's consent to include them at at the present time uh we have identified two of those Parcels which are you see in Blue uh as future expansion Parcels because we do have an option on those so we have the ability to acquire them and include them in the future um in in reviewing And discussing with your staff the criteria for creation of the district is sufficiently contiguous sufficiently compact the statute does explicitly contemplate uh that you may have out Parcels within the boundaries of a district you just have to identify them uh so we're very comfortable that the development has approved under the existing PUD uh can proceed and that the district can serve its function to finance own and maintain the infrastructure uh regardless of whether those out Parcels ever come in right um so on the the top right um parcel it looks like it bisects like a ranch um like the um Ranch yard just from my experience of our Ranch yard is that it looks like some of the some of the buildings are in your property and some aren't it's just kind of odd I I mean I'm going to vote for approval I just I just never seen anything like this so I those I think those are as identified in petition are owned by Evans properties um I I can't really speak to whether there's a the building current status um but but there are not proposed to be included at the present time oh so um I want to ask the County Attorney I guess these are um identified by um boundary line you know legal boundaries because to me it looks like it's splitting that person's house in half so I don't understand how some of house is in it some isn't or property so is that there may there may be a boundary dispute between between owners but the way the petition should be filed is that all of the owners who are who are being subjected to the CDD are petitioners and those who are not who are who have not signed who have not given their consent are excluded um so I can't I mean this could be a GIS error um I I see what you're talking about is the the Bold yellow line goes down through what looks like the middle of a house but yeah um I would be happy to speak to that I mean uh what we have is is a graphic uh and it does have you know very thick lines um if you look at the legal description which is attached to the petition and is also therefore incorporated into your ordinance um it does specifically describe the properties we have 100% consent from all of the owners of the property who are proposed to be included within the community development District uh as well as the um ability in the future to bring in those expansion parts once they're acquired so there is no existing home that is being split by this uh by this legal descriptor line I think what we just have is a graphic where we have

you know broader lines than otherwise would really be indicated if we drew it as precise we wouldn't be able to see it on the map okay and um County attorney I'm talking about you know the where those four squares are in the middle they're not quite squares trapezoids whatever there's two that are hatched I'm talking about that property right there it's like going right through it that's what I have aern um but I I agree with Mr shot the petitioner is the one who has the most at risk I am sure that they have calculated where their ownership ends and we have indeed and I think what we just have it's it's it's hard to show the line of that looking so thick that it looks like it's going over that but we're not including any property that we don't have consent nor are we splitting in existing and that doesn't come back on us that will come back on them if there's and and for those people to access their property they they will come in on your roads I don't the roads with the roads that are that are within and financed by the CDD those are all public roads there's no access restrictions over them so there there should be no impediment whatsoever for anyone accessing their property and and I'm guessing they access it from that road that runs parallel that that's going east west and your construction can't keep them from coming to their it will not keep them from accessing the property at all I just I've never seen one with Parcels in the middle like that remember this is a financing vehicle so if the plan of development the MPD which I'm assuming you've since they're showing a boundary you've already approved would would be what would allow them access or not you they they can't cut they can't cut historic access off unless they provide other access correct agreed totally on behalf of the petition okay those are all my questions we have no one else signed up no one else signed up is anyone in the audience wish to speak to this item move to approve okay second got a motion and second is this a roll call roll call roll call vote did you have a second yeah I did second right okay mar mar commissioner two or District Two commissioner wman I District three commissioner starky I District Four commissioner Jer I District Five commissioner Maran I district one chairman up I motion pass 5 okay we'll move to uh p59 we've already done 58 that's correct is that right that's correct p59 uh we have proof of notice of this meeting by affidavit from by mail and posting by the applicant Mr chairman would you like me to read the procedures I would like to hear the uh rooms for the public hearings yep there are two resoning agendas regular and consent staff will present each application to the board of County Commissioners if sta if staff or Planning Commission recommended approval and there is no

opposition the application will be considered by the board without further presentation if the staff or Planning Commission has recommended denial or if there is opposition to the application the applicant will be given five minutes for presentation the opposition will be given three minutes for each individual or five minutes for group representative and the applicant will be given 3 minutes for rebuttal any individual disagreeing with staff or Planning Commission recommendation or anyone wishing to object to any condition of the resoning May at this time time requests that a petition be the peti a petition be pulled from the consent agenda in which case that application will be heard under the regular agenda later on during the meeting otherwise all resoning applications on the consent agenda will be approved by a single motion and vote if you wish to speak to any petition please give your name and address and whether or not you've been sworn for the record these are Quasi judicial public hearings the law in Florida is that mere public support or opposition of an application is insufficient for this board to take action please limit your comments to those criteria found within the board's Land Development code Mr clerk would you like to swear them in please if those anyone who is Desiring to give testimony in the resoning matters if you please rise are there anyone other that are Desiring to give testimony in these matters do each of you swear or affirm that the testimony you will give is the truth so have you got that it please confirm when you come to the podium that you have been sworn thank you all right item p59 good afternoon Commissioners Denise Hernandez Planning Development and economic growth department itm p59 is p24 7597 it's a zoning amendment in under the name of kacis West mpud sr52 limited partnership the request is to continue the item to the September 3rd 2024 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 in dat City okay um pleases board for motion move approval move continue continue move to continue second to continue second I'm the second time certain okay September 9 time certain uh September 3rd 2024 1:30 dat C okay uh all those in favor say I I all oppos like sign okay motion passes 5 Z move on to the next item would be item number p60 and this is the start of our consent items first consent item B6 um Mr chairman at this point we have no one signed up to speak to any of the consent it uh correction on item 63 we have an a person signed to speak Charles Hall understand we'll take them one at a time do you want to do proof of publication for p60 publication on p60 May 22nd 2024 addition of the Tampa Bay times thank you item p60 is PG 24353 this is a development agreement Dew East m PUD master plan unit development pting

Homes company LLC this is we're requesting that you approve the development agreement to design permit and construct improvements to water grass Parkway and Wells Road in exchange for transportation development free credits um this item we did add an addition to one of the exhibits which um under your attachments is listed as as exhibit B the applicant has decided to call that Exhibit C but it's just an addition to that exhibit that was provided to the clerk's office uh this uh was presented to the Pasadena Hills planning and policy committee on June 5th 2024 and it went to the local planning Agency on July 11th 2024 we ask that you approve the development agreement okay is anyone here to speak against this item see and no one we move on leave it on consent and move to p61 approve of publication Tampa Bay Times June 26 2024 item p61 is P2 24783 this is a zoning Amendment under sa development Partners LLC for Change and Zoning from a C2 General commercial district and C3 commercial light manufacturing district with specific use to a three commercial light manufacturing districts um with the applicant has agreed to record a voluntarily agreed upon deed restrictions that request that require a step out to the West sidewalk connection to the north and those deed restrictions that are um specific to the live local act this comes to with a recommendation of approval from the the planning and development economic growth department and the Planning Commission is anyone here speak against this item um against no but I have I want to make a comment on the one that was before I don't need to pull it but I want to make a comment the one before but you finish this one and then I'll come back to is anyone here to speak to this item seeing no one it remains on consent uh p62 approve for publication Tampa Bay Times June 26 20124 item Pak 62 is PG 24788 it's a Zone Amendment um under the name of Dave Mitchell's holding company Mitchell Clinton resoning for a change in zoning from r1mh single family mobile home district and C2 General commercial District to a C2 General commercial district with a voluntarily agreed upon deed restriction related to the live local act comes here with a recommendation of approval from the Planning Development and economic growth department and the Planning Commission okay is anyone here to speak against this item um I see no one I have a question and I on p62 yeah and and it would be the same to the one before um CU this is the area where and I asked this in my meetings with stack this is the area where the do in the county that we did not put in the multi-use pack have we determined which side of the road that's going to go on at this area is going to be on the North or the South Side when we go to connect this to 301 because on this is on the North side

p61 is on the south side it's got to go on one of those two sides so I just want to make sure we're reserving the land that we need for that multi-use P Liam Divine planning and economic growth department so there is currently so going back to p61 um you're were saying that's on the South Side there's currently a 12T wide multi-use um path already in existent that was just put there and that's on the North side however it stops at curly road and it does not continue on so after curly road going east um which is where p62 is on the North side um there's just two 5ft sidewalks on both side um I don't know if it's been planned for I can tell you it's not currently in the CIP plan well that's a problem because we've already met with do and we know that they have the RightWay and we're going to talk about at the N meeting to put it back in from curly to prospect on the North side we don't know I think it's coming across the street from prospect on but someone needs to make a decision here and for you to not even know I mean oh I'm so frustrated that that we're so peac meal that we we're trying to reserve this land commissioner if I might Clark hobby hobby and hobby PA have been sworn this is not that section of 52 at all this is on the west side of marata this is not near curly this is about 2 miles away from the section you're talking about this okay so this one wait which one this this is west of marada just west of marada where the old broken down uh I think it was like some kind of warehousing thing was there but there's a multi-use path in the area on the North and then there the path required by connected City that are that's what the the conditions and the deed restriction are about are building the path connections that are required by connected City okay so there's already one on the North side I I think we're confusing two of the items which is p61 and 62 so I think we're on P6 two okay well I asked a question on both so not all right so P so 61 is okay 62 is what you're currently looking at on the area right so I'm I'm asking staff I'm asking my planners I'm asking somebody when we fixed the mistake of when we stopped the multi-use path at Curly from Prospect East which side of that road is it going to be on Mr chairman you want to just pull this UNC consent and then we'll talk about it because we pull give chance to pull up a bigger map all right then they can figure out who's going to who's going to tell us what the plan again you asked staff for the answers before this meeting uh I did not have a meeting on 62 I had a meeting on no I don't have a me I mean you've gone over these items but you said you asked staff you didn't get an answer so I have a problem I thought I asked had a meeting on this Mitchell one and I asked that is that this Mitchell yeah Mitchell but they but I didn't have an answer Denise you have some I just said it has to be

addressed but no one's addressed it that's my problem I I think we have a few people in in the audience that can assist with um including but not limited to our County engineer um so is just being are we pulling that from consent item p62 yeah why don't we do that all right and I believe the applicant is um is on on WebEx on that one that's Barbara will heighten so that that is the end of your consent agenda um uh P because p63 has been pulled by yes and there's someone signed up to speak on that one as well and I did want to make a comment on the road the road on the first one on P p60 p60 just one when I look at that I know it's too late I I talked to Mike gin about this and others this road section it is 142 ft that is that is such a lot that is a lot of land and and I and hey I'm all for you know I want the multiuser Trail on one side and sidewalk on one and but to have from the edge of the road um all the way over 29 ft uh you're you're going to have to be running to cross these streets and here we're trying to build walkable communities and I believe these Road sections are crazy expensive and I think we made a mistake in these um to to look if you look on on the right hand side or the left hand side it's 29 ft from The Edge to the side already under construction oh I why why did we do that I Clark you yeah I believe all these Road sections are based on the Villages of Pasadena Hills plan so that's already approved within that V barn or whatever they say um I just think we were way way out a line to be asking these guys to build roads like this personally we would have been a lot better with more roads and smaller roads and a grid than having these gigantic you got traffic okay Mr angle David angle Planning Development economic growth the road cross-sections are part of the vop plan yeah we've retained Bill Oliver to do a new study for vop to ascertain if we could reduce these roadways and uh I can't I can't speak to this because it's already a given but in the future and next year we'll have new new recommendations for roadways yeah I think um I think we need to do and I guess p62 is a p because there's just want to let you know there's sidewalks on both sides of U side yeah supposed to have the most used trail on one of those sites so I I want to pull that for discussion so so you've got 60 and 61 I think for approval so you're pulling 62 now I'm sorry which is the I'm confused she she wanted 62 pulled pulled yeah so I I mooved to approve 661 I got a motion second a second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 on p61 P p60 p61 now p62 what is the question okay so presentation for p62 Li Divine planning and economic growth Department

p62 PowerPoint unless we don't want a presentation no I just all I'm asking is we we you know so I the I think the the question might be better suited to your transportation engineering department right um because that would be with the CIP and extending that I can just tell you where the current Trail stops at curly Road it's on the North side yes I'm so so I don't know if they would continue it on the North side but I don't think there's any plan to but that question would be for your for Ted okay this is why we need that trail person hire welcome Nick hi I'm T hey Nick uh good afternoon Nick you R County engineer the question is are we gon to build a wider sidewalk on the North or the South so you're aware I think um the multi-use path which was supposed to be all along the north side of 52 connecting to the 301 Trail was narrowed was stopped at curu by some someone's decision not ours um we had no knowledge that someone decided to stop that um so uh we met with do we've talked a couple times with them that we want it to continue and they have said they have the right away to continue it on the North side from curly to prospect but from prospect on to 301 there's there's more challenges and it was thought that it needed to go my understanding my recollection was that it probably needs to go on the north side of prospect so we've been reserving that every time a project comes through we've been reserving side of north side of what I'm sorry south side of prospect south I mean 52 Clinton Bay whatever you call it from Prospect East Clinton Avenue yeah the old Clinton um and so we've been reserving that every time a project comes through here um I just wanted to be sure if you guys have had further discussions that that is where where it's going to go I'm going to ask on every piece that comes up on Clinton because I don't want to have a project go and then we then we have to stop then then it goes from a multi-use path to the sidewalk multi-use path so Mr chair I I guess the the best response I can give you at this point in time we don't have a design for the pathway east of prospect putting it on the North or the South side but there is a condition of approval on this resoning that requires them to convey right away from the center line of the road consistent with with our comprehensive plan WID which would give us the option to put a pathway on the North side should this resoning be approved and this and this petition conveys the land needed it keeps our doors open y keep the door open that's all I'm asking hold on M Mr chairman yes but who's going to pay for the sidewalk shouldn't we have them paying for it I I I don't think that's you know I don't know if that's been determined yet but at least we got to make sure we have the land to do it yeah I agree with that but then this we're making all these other developments put the trail in or put the sidewalk in that should be part of their development agreement it should be something in front and that should be

done at time of construction not after the fact so if we think we want an eight or 12 then we have the right status for it then let's let's ask for it now you know we don't have that one person in charge of all of this right now I do believe they they've interviewed someone about to hire someone so it's not me Mr chairman you've got I don't know that you've taken public comment on this but you've also got an applicant online that probably wants to address this um the same one 62 okay volume can you hear me yes can you hear me yes hi Mr chairman Commissioners height so this property is already Zone SE along Clinton Avenue and there's already a sine approved along Clinton Avenue that sets out the requirements for development along Clinton Avenue what we're doing here is a clean up because we have a parcel under single ownership that has split zoning we have a commercial land use on the entire parcel and we have split commercial and residential so this this action is to reone the residential portion which is to the back of the parcel um so this we really don't have ility to effectuate anything other than what Mr your County engineer said which is already in the staff right up we don't have any ability to effectuate this we already have the project already has a through sight plan it's got a requirement for conveyance rway and ultimately all we're doing is cleaning up a split zoning situation on this property okay you know when when I look at the maps when when we look at the maps that are in our um uh in the application on on one map it goes all the way to the edge of Clinton but on another map there is a gap um between the parcel and Clinton it so it's a little so commissioner I been happy to continue this so I can be there in person and we can go over this with staff and have a little better answer and presentation to you if that's acceptable we'll continue well if that if that comment if that comment that the County engineer said is in there that if we do if it if it is coming on that side then there's land for it that's all that we need I don't need any that's what I mentioned a minute ago Mr CH that's fine too the DED restriction in your package just scrolling down just head it up hey Mr chairman will he looks at that yes uh Barb yes congratulations but this is no way to spend the honeymoon I did show your picture I did show a picture nocy I'm teing this up I'm happy so we can come back let's be all be comfortable everything I ask you to do is something that you're comfortable doing so I'm fine continue to the next meeting in D City and we'll we'll bring it back and give a little more make sure we can answer your questions move to continue so she can get back to her honeymoon second so let's still a public hearing do anyone want to speak to this item

today or when it comes back D City at time certain so if there's no one there the the motion would be to continue to September 3rd at 1:30 or soon thereafter in D City so move second got a motion a second all those in favor say I I it's continued now now it's what commission 7 o' go have dinner 62 bye thank you congratulations okay we will move forward to um p63 proof publication in the May 22nd 2024 addition of Tampa Day times supplemented by Affidavit of [Music] c um Nick can I ask you a question are we allowed to talk during this hey chairman no you have ask him a question okay Mr chairman back on okay 9 minutes okay uh Denise Hernandez Planning Development and econ economic growth on this item just wanted to do a housekeeping before Mr pitos uh does his presentation there are two exp partes um that will be submitted to the clerk's office uh one from commissioner Mariano and one from commissioner Jer on this item thank you I need to clarify that um U the public notice also that this item those postings were made for a previous meeting which was continued July 9th to this meeting so this is a continuation of a previously posted meeting okay p63 thank you Mr chairman item p63 is pg24 7683 it's a zoning Amendment Crossways mpud Cross by Crossways 301 LLC uh the proposal before the board of County Commissioners today is to change the zoning from AC agricultural District on the subject property to an mpud master plan unit development there are two future land use designations on the site the minority uh future land use designation is RO retail office residential is just a very tiny sliver on the North End and the majority of the proper Is Res six residential six delling unit per gross acre the purpose of the mpud initially came in to allow a maximum of up to30 single family homes uh there is a second alternative or option to uh the the purpose of the cpud which is to allow a maximum of up to 40 single family detached dwelling units uh on the total 29.5 acres and we'll talk a little bit about that uh just a minute here the location is on the northeast corner of US Highway 98 West of old Lakeland Highway this is where it's located in Pasco County it's on the Southeast very Southeast side of uh D city right off of us98 we zoom in a little bit further and we notice that on 35a yeah it lays on 35a not 98 yes correct old L Highway uh and we zoom in and we can see that it's right off of Old lak Highway and 98 is just south of it it is approximately one mile east of dat city as you travel down uh 98 we have the Triple J mpud which is just to the east this is a res 3 mpud that has approximately 600 plus units approved for it back in 2006 nothing of that development has been built to date

uh and just on the east side of of old Lakeland Highway is the CSX rail line and right away zoom in just a little bit further to see what's the zoning here right now cuz I thought you said it but I didn't quite AC agricultural District okay all right that's what I thought and this is the actual zoom in of the subject property um Lakeland Highway is just to the east as we noted and then you can see the CSX line uh messic road is just to the South uh the property does sort of stretch or make a Reach For It U but it does not get to us98 this is the existing Z short of short of 98 it does not quite reach 98 so it doesn't connect to 98 there on that not not as the partial lines are okay uh this is the AC zoning District on the subject property here's the future land use situation majority of the site is res six as you can see and then the very sliver on the top here is partly in Ro uh this is the conceptual site plan uh indicated within the mpud in a north south orientation uh this is essentially showing the road layout that the project is going to uh have regardless of whichever option they were initially considering 130 single family homes or the 40 half L uh this is it turned on its site so you can actually read the uh plan now North is to the left uh same plan as before with the uh Road network uh this was the initial idea with regard to the 130 single family detached homes where in blue is where you would have had the 40 foot wide Lots uh and in red is where the 50 foot wide Lots would have been uh the breakdown of those entitlements are as such here you would have had in in the first option option A you would have had 40 foot wide single family detach slots uh equating to about 65 units and another 65 units at the 50 foot wide single family detach lots for a total of uh 40 do my match right no 130 uh 4.4 dwelling in this per gr secer all homes on 40t wide Lots would be rear loaded uh prior to this meeting however the applicant has uh relayed to the Planning Development economic growth department they are uh in line to do option b uh which would be the Halfacre size single family detach Lots which would mean that they would only get 40 Lots on the property that would reduce the density down to 1.35 GL units per acre this is an update uh to the project uh as we've been preparing to bring this the board count Commissioners uh if we go with option b we'll have to uh update the conditions of approval of the Mudd and possibly bring back just a a quick revision to illustrate that nevertheless we can delete no utilities at all no utilities here at all water sewer anything right there's no capacity no no capacity at all for this is it is it it's not a part it's still in the county is not a part of any uh annexation of Dade City or anything of that nature that is correct unincorporated p okay um the takeway from the surrounding conditions analysis is that the triple

JMP is just to the West at 636 dwelling units as I noted earlier um and along Old Lakeland Highway there is a dedication of rideway that will eventually be needed RightWay varies a little bit but all of it will have to come from the west side of Old lakon Highway because on the east side is the CSX railroad so any further widening of old Lakeland will need to come subject property um at least along the extent of the project site this is likely to be somewhere between 20 or so feet and maybe 30 ft of additional ride away that will be determined more precisely at the time of preliminary development what is sness um ultimately the applicant agreed to volunteer architectual controls in introduced in PM 26 um and we recommend uh that the board of County Commissioners approved the planning commission's recommendation to adopt the zoning Amendment with the provision for the applicant to pursue only one option option b which would allow entitlements to build 40 single family detach units on Halfacre size lots that would utilize well and septic systems this on your agenda memos is alternative Motion One well my my problem with this this project right here is the fact that there's no water over here at all uh Halfacre tracks with well and septic I think it too close and this is sitting out at the rural area that's going to look like a subdivision out in no man's land because of the rural area and nature of that area that's by old l Road so I if if we did well in septic I'd want to see at least uh 2 and a half acre lots or better to be a rural nature okay any questions from anyone anyone I think we have somebody signed up to speak Charles Hall well um I do have a question if you don't mind coming back up I saw something called A J uh a develop is that a development near it when you showed the pictures yes what what is that it's a residential development um Triple J Ranch mpud was approved for 636 dwelling units in res 3 flu back on November 8 2006 see other side and I can show the area there it is and that so what is that per per did you say Res three it was Res three so it would be three dwelling units per gross acre or less and it probably is much less the size of the property problem what I can't hear you given the size of the property which second County Pump House do they have water and sewer out there as well no no and um and then next to it is that a mobile home park it's called country air Manor where's it at um it's it's that that white stuff in the middle there yes that's so what what are they is that a mobile home park on Sewer Septic I mean they're on they WR how did they get septic like that they've been there for decades many years oh God that's got to

be a mess no they have it on pack oh they have their own plant they have a plant yeah package plant the density of trip which has been allowed WR yeah the density of the triple JM QD is approximately 2.6 bu units per gross AC and this one is 1.3 this under option b it would be 1.3 it's less than it's not it's less than across the street okay let's let's hear from Mr Hall Mr all I don't believe that you were sworn previously so if you would please raise your right hand you swear affirm the testimony you will give in this matter is the truth so have you got I do name and address for the record please I'm Charles Hall 10,1 old Lakeland Highway D City go ahead sir okay uh thank you for allowing me to come and spend a few minutes to express my opinion and concerns I will not be eloquent I don't do this for a living uh approximately 30 years ago my parents gifted my wife and me an acre of land if we should decide to move from P County back to Pasco County where I grew up this is family priv did it give us name and address um was TW about 25 years ago my wife and I decided it's time for us to move back to Pasco County and we began to BU to build our house and we were told you have to have a 10 acre minimum for a house back then we went to the County Commission the we applied for res zoning and they granted res Zoning for two separate adjacent acres of land for one house for one acre the second piece was that we had friends that would want to join us up here since that time we have inherited and been gifted additional acre which includes the Crossways proposed development [Music] things well in and doing our research preparing to to sell some of the proper it got time for us to to get rid of part of it so we decided to sell two or three 10 15 acre pieces of property so people could build a house have a it would fit the rural setting with a decent house maybe a barn with some cows goats whatever we went at to the planning Council the Planning Commission over in Newport Richie they said the we can sell the 10 15 acre pieces of property the first person can build a house sub subsequent people cannot build a house because it would be a subdivision which they said there is a way around it it will be expensive and take a long time so we we eventually sold 292 Acres which is going to be the proposed Crossway subdivision we know things are going to change but we we still have concerns and questions we're concerned about the water table if it's 40 single H single family houses or if that's 130 if the water table drops below our well level what are our options another concern is with all the the development that's going in along Old Lakeland Road there's going to be a

lot more traffic and what are our options for our Ingress and egress from our property and I guess that sing means my time is up you have 1 minute sir yeah have one minute left okay well those two options are the main ones those two concerns the water and our Ingress and egress to our property are the main main issues right now okay my suggestion would be that you approve minimum 5 acre lots if that will happen I don't know is it this your property yeah no it was sold was ad to he sold the 49 and they they did make they have agreed to put in an 8ft block wall divide separating the development from our property which we do appreciate that but we still do have the other concerns so that's that's your 10 acres just south of that property right yes it's 11 acres or 11 right well I see a bunch of mobile homes south of that property one house he's got he's got about one one lot there Leb maker lot I don't think he wants 120 homes to the north side of it so that looks like a barn that is that a barn and your neighbor is this recycled can business there's another uh property between us and the recyclers is that a residential property across the street from you no that's it's a business well I personally think a half acre is okay um 40 40 homes isn't going to make a big difference on Old Lakeland Highway well it does when it's rule Mr chairman is this part of the East Pasco rule protection area no it's not but it's it's in my protection area because I get calls every day from my citizens over there not wanting these kind of uh developments to pop up in their neighborhoods when they're got a rule setting just like Mr Char has Mr Mar so is his time up or is he still going is his time still up are you finished sir are you finished up yeah okay your three minutes is up Mr well my opin my opinion is is the county I don't like what the county did to us we were zoned one house to 10 acres we are in a rural setting and now it turns out you want to allow what 4 and a half houses 4 point what houses per acre um I you know I'd love for staff to address that if it was 10 it no way fits the rural setting right splitting okay okay Mr Hall your time's up thank sir thank you sir thank you the other persons I have signed up fore I got a question over here so don't we usually have the applicant come up at some point yes shouldn't the applicant before you take public comment yes yeah what happened there uh yeah I believe the other person signed up are wait no we haven't had the applicant speak yet I believe they're representing but I thank you Shelley Johnson 6400 Madison Street and I have been sworn just to give I I've been listening to the comments and I will address Mr Hall's concerns about the water table as well as um the surrounding area and what's being

proposed if you look at this development it's actually north of Crossways there's actually pretty intense Industrial Development already around this property the north side has Transport Services there's two operations that are running you know some tractor trailer operations to the South you have I think the commissioner mentioned rnl Metals which looks like it has some pretty heavy operations is going on it's a recycling of metals um across the street you have Pasco Fleet which is another Transport service with semis and they've got some pretty significant stuff going on on that property and of course Triple J um which already has the 636 single family um approved developments you know once there's some water and SE that comes out there you do have south of this property I think that was what you were pointing to appala Trails and Sunburst Hills which are residential developments they're on Halfacre lots and they are on well and septic um the reason we're fine with option b and and your comp plan permits it is it allows up to 49 units to be on well and septic in these subdivisions your actual comp plan policy provides for that utilities has signed off on us going to well and septic and of course we're under the 49 we at 40 um so you actually have a comp Caan policy that permits us to utilize well and septic and and given the various concerns that were raised that's why we decided to go in that direction um as far as the water table I know that a te is around or he maybe to answer some questions but um obviously any Wells and subject that has to go through d as well as um probably some Swift mun permitting I'm know better on that but um obviously they're not going to allow any Wells to impact you know someone else's Wells on their property and again your comp plan allows for this um so I think some of that's probably been taken into consideration in terms of what's okay for you know health and safety but um there is significant Industrial non-residential Development around this property there is happen take lots already existing around this property they're on wall and septic um our traffic study didn't show any impacts to into Lakeland old Lakeland Highway um you know the level service is good with or without this development um and of course access management as far as turn lanes and stuff will be dealt with at the time of engineering but um we would like for support for staff's recommendation on option b given that your staff supports it your comp plans supports it um it it really based on what's actually really going on out around this property on the ground is as what's planned long term um it really does um seem to be a good good option for us so we would ask for your support and I'll be have to answer any other questions um Mr waitman thank chair you cite the businesses but the businesses that are in this area they are trucking businesses but they're not running at the volume of traffic that a highdensity neighborhood would run on a daily basis

uh these businesses have been around a long time they're well established and anybody who's familiar with this area knows you know a lot of them are Over The Road Trucking Company so they load up and they take off we hours morning or what have you so I'm more inclined with Chairman's thought of two 2 and A2 acre home sites for this general area if we're going to go residential um if not residential ideally it's a it's a it's prime time for job creating location next to other businesses um so I'm I'm kind of aligned with the chair and not aligned with staff's recommendation on this I I have a question well let's let's finish the public comment because there may be so is anyone else here wish to speak to this item that has not spoken is anyone on WebEx no sir not side okay now back to the board and we'll uh have any questions yeah can you um can you go close can you um go to yeah what is the property that is facing 98 this one over here that has a house um okay see where that little piece comes down on this property the the proposed yeah what is that property to the left of that corner there right on the left here at the bottom what kind of zoning is that this one yeah there's about three homes or there may be trailers I see mobile homes I see I was put in there years ago so it says mobile home subdivision um and it's there's four mobile homes there and I mean no I'm looking at the property praiser site I don't know what is actually there because it looks to me like there's more there than it's actually on the property pra s it's a AC zoning huh that's that's the same zoning as the other but it has 1 2 3 four five six at least six maybe seven homes on it how's that possible I was done before our time that's existing Denise Hernandez Planning Development economic growth we we have not searched it but we could look to see if there's a non-conforming use determination if there's a a pre uh pre- datings zoning December 1st of 1975 situation going on there I mean I if you give me a few minutes I can probably see what I can find if that's something that's that the Board needs to know yes okay so I'm looking at Google Maps and I see 1 2 3 four five six houses on let me see how much land that is would you like you can't talk sorry sorry um how big is that lot 11.78 that propert that property you're looking at there was approved many years ago maybe 30 or so years ago uh Mr Keith was the owner of that at the time had his home there and he put in those other he got approval to be able to put in the other four or five mobile homes and they were Ryals and helped him in his livelihood but I was done commission 30 years ago that those have been that was

approved over 30 years ago yeah um but I don't I I just think it's very inconsistent to say they have to be if you live out here where these folks and he can have you know multif family um and then you got Industrial across the street actually the best story I've heard is should we consider that is that best to be job creating rather than houses I think that but I don't think it's fair to say everyone else can have that kind of zoning across the street you got R three you got the mobile home park but this guy but you're in a rural area so he has to have two and a half acres that I I I think we be very inconsistent with that kind of ru Mr chairman I can't help what what was done 34 years ago when they set that up the fact of it is it's there and we're living with it we don't have to keep having 40 and 50ft lots and Halfacre Lots in the rural area where the way of life out there is rural Mr chairman yes and another point to it that's on us98 this road this parcel doesn't connect this no that property doesn't the property we're talking does not connect so it's a different but those it's a different Road those trailers right there are 98 right there the trailers are 98 these are not that property is on 35a which is the old Lakeland Highway right on the east side of that road plus the railroad tracks on the opposite side of that road so the consistency part doesn't drive with me that it's a different roadway different type of roadway right any other place yes ma'am what what was the staff's recommendation for the Crossways mpud the staff recommendation was to approve the planning commission's recommendation to adopt the zoning Amendment which would allow entitlements to build 40 single family detached units on half excise L yeah I I'm still I think that's very consistent with the neighborhood um I don't how you Sor I don't know how you come with that conclusion out of the rural area and there's nothing else around there well you know what when they approved Oakstead it was in the rural area too look at it now so um so we keep building but half you want to half acre is not dense 40 foots I'd say that's pretty dense you're talking about well and sepy that's half acre lots on that piece of property and put 40 Lots that's that's a lot of well and setic those are shallow Wells are not deep well what is the plan for utilities up there what they're proposing well and septic on the no no what is the County's future plan the city that's in the city I think the city would tie in this would end up yeah we don't have we don't have water sore out that area we get pass count utilities at Hana with the Pesco County Utilities um that part of the county is far uh away from any Central water or Central

sewer that we have right now uh we are assuming uh um low density which is really I mean we're it's not going to be served by water and sewer in this area the only water close by is the Sunburst wealth which is really uh just south of this project and it's at maximum capacity right now we don't have any room to provide for this project and that's where we ended up deciding that this cannot get water right so is that what's keeping that Flying J or whatever that property was that that's what's keeping that other property getting developed so I'm not sure about the density of Triple J you talking about Triple J Triple J Triple J is is probably one septic so oh I got you um but uh yeah we uh we are at maximum capacity right now and it's just serving the area around that Sunburst Wells on 98 there is a 12in water main that serves that area and um I see day City keeps annexing on the other side are they working their way cuz once they Annex it it's going to be 40ft lots front loaded um are they working way this way too D city they're quite some distance they're they're short of this proper okay well those they City doesn't have water sewer either for yeah for the ones they they I'm not sure miss Jagger I just want had a comment that I'm I'm going to go with you commissioner Oakley just because this is your area these are your people you getting the phone calls and um I I'm not found that there's no water or sewer so so in terms of the date City anex ations I don't know what their annexation plans or priorities are um what I understand right now is that our map isn't showing the DAT City boundar the extent of the DAT City boundaries they have descended so to speak to town Zen Road in US 8 that's the furthest extent south and east as a crow F that's not very far from this property but right that's about a mile they still have D city has annexed a lot of property out this way toward 98 to the south of date City and they don't have supply of water or sewer for for connecting to any of those properties so they can't even have projects new projects inside that Annex uh City area because they don't have water and sewer for that's the same thing that happened to the west of date cities some they do some they don't so they don't at this time so thinking a big picture so we don't waste a lot of people's time is is it the is it our intent to take all this land that is not developed in this area and down Zone it so that I mean no you're you're not talking about down zoning you're talking about higher density no I'm asking if it's for 10 right now if if all this land that's out here are we wanting it to be 2 Acres or more per unit cuz I don't think what what all what's in the comp plan now out there

what's the plan it's agricultural land the the particular area subject site itself is res six res six on the east side of old Lakeland Highway you have agricultural rural which is point2 dwelling unit per gross are how many I don't know why I can't hear you I'm sorry on the east side of old Lakeland beyond the CSX Corridor it's the future land use is agricultural rural which is2 dwelling units per gross acre to the south of the subject site so that's half acre lots point no point no that's over an acre lot that's 5 acre lot 5 acre lot to the south at the inter at the bridge here hello [Laughter] shake it harder I don't know well at the north at the North uh east corner northwest corner of us98 and old Lakeland Highway right where they come together uh you have uh ilil future land use industrial Light surrounded by ro retail office residential which has a max density of 24 dwelling units per gross acre along that that node right there surrounding that is res 3 and then to the north again you have more industrial Light future menus I think I think I think in applications like this it's good to see the overall picture of the area that we're talking about truck trucking so I can tell you it's R most of it was Grove land and and pasture land but it it it's rural when you look at it so was our Ranch so is my blueberry farm but it's res y'all decided to change it it's no we don't have to change it it's res H it's res n but it's a blueberry farm it's it's multif family but it's a blueberry farm so just cuz it looks like that zoning was changed it was egg before that so the these are the future lers categor well there's two different levels here so here you have a red three which kind of wraps around to the South barely see there the red six uh District if you will where the subject property is in Ro I out here I to the north and all this is uh at the agricultural rur on the other side but on this side it's six dwelling units per the acre and you're proposing two dwelling units one point what 1 1.3 I don't know what basis you're denying it on I think it's too dense for the area that's in but it's res six Serv there's no services all but but they're allowed to do well in septic on a half acre or larger I I'm not a land use attorney looking at my attorney what I mean I looking at if if the board believes that this is not the appropriate timing or it's not compatible with its surrounding uses the board may deny the rezone and leave it at at AC or whatever it is now just if if we're talking about it you have a line of businesses Trucking operations on the west side of old Lakeland Highway right at a major intersection with 98 improvements going east towards Lakeland I think it's better suited for a job creating site personally than residential right there but if we do go residential uh higher density isn't going to cut

it half acre but it's it's prime location for potential for Commerce well if chair has any thoughts on on that opportunity not if he wants it to stay a it just to me it just doesn't seem the timings right for this so uh there's a lot of lot of land that hadn't been made in higher density coming out of date City before you get your way out here is that date city where it's dark blue it says annexation right there yes that might be some of their new annexation and how how far is that about one mile 86 miles one mile I just don't feel it fits for for the timing what we're talking about now Mr chairman yes sir um like to ask the applicant if they would be willing to go to the 2 and half acres so the question is if if you would be able to go to 2 and a half acre sites I mean I think from the applicants perspective um you know they they're already the site can allow under R six 176 units so they're down to 1.3 units per acre they're they're actually 40 units versus 176 units which is what the land use permits so I think they're to the point where they're you know there's not much more that they can carve out of this in terms of reducing density I think they probably would rather I can ask them they're not here I can check with them really quickly but I think they may want to just go ahead and you know move forward with whatever the board's recommendation is and go from there I mean I think you're looking at denial if it's if it's denied you're going to wait a year to come back right right yeah that's saying what about one acre yeah maybe you know one acre versus half acre I mean 2 and 1/2 acres is quite large for you know what's going on around this property there is you know a lot of um more dense Development coming online there's you know dense development and in Dade City there's the I think as the commissioner pointed out some stuff to the South that's you know a little bit denser it's you know they're on half AC or Lots on W and septic so to go you know given we're on this side of the you know the the rail line um and it is R six you know maybe one acre lots they would be okay with that but 2 and half acres is just kind of out of character but obviously you know we're going to go with whatever the board's recommendation is because we do want to move forward so sh there's stuck on residential only yeah this has been residential because it's red six what we have what I was mentioning back there is to do non-residential on this piece you'd have to do a a flume Amendment so whoever would have to come in would have to go through a whole you know future land use amendment in order to do anything nonresidential on it which you know I don't know that that is feasible so I still I I think through it but I still can't U support that 2 and a half acres possibly but nothing nothing more dense than that in this

area I'll be happy to answer to the questions yeah I mean we would you know one acre would be better than two and a half acres but um you know they do want to move forward so whatever the board's recommendation is you know that's what we're going to go with that's you know we want you all to be comfortable and it's your choice so but we do think that it's significantly reduced at 40 units under rest 6 cuz we are literally at 1.3 units per acre so what would two and how many would two and a half acres give you um I don't know done the maap on that I probably cut it in half almost 20 some units there isn't any even at the 176 units um the traffic study that was done by Elizabeth Rodriguez um there's nothing even at 176 unes which of course is not what's before you today it was not triggering anything in terms of level of service on Old Lakeland Highway so there was no issues there either it'll give us 12 units 2 and so we did agree I know Mr Hall had had the question about the wall we did agree to an 8ft wall on that on that uh southern end adjacent to his property he did request that so we did agree with that as well so um we're good with all the conditions of approval if you just want to remove condition a um I think there's a lot of good stuff in there that's you know will be good for the county and is you know part of subdivision approval so we're fine with all those conditions to remain I'll make a motion to approve with 13 units how many 13 tough to build half a unit Why 13 tough to build half a unit that's a ODOT number can I answer commissioner starky's question from earlier on 2.33 Acres so according to our historical Maps there were three mobile homes on that property so our 1975 maps and two homes on that property so a total of five units on that property per our 1975 Maps so it would be like a legal non-conforming yeah there's six on there I'm looking at at it on Pas yeah it's been like that a long time 34 one one owner and there's at least one unit there that was from 1958 crazy I remember when they did it but I don't remember uh I wasn't here for the activity on so all right I have a motion this it's D without a second I didn't get a second on 13 units I'll make a motion for 15 units why I like light industrial on this thing it's res six doesn't matter it's aligned with Trucking operations everything at a US Highway intersection yeah next to rail no massive Improvement ra on the other side it is but but you also have going south going Southeast I mean it's a it's a prime intersection for Commerce in my opinion you got the expansion of 98 going Southeast andake doesn't matter if there's a water and sewer for for a you get a package plan Mr chairman now we we don't do package plants now yes sir it's aack maybe we talk to the applicant about and continue this and maybe talk to them about doing a board

initiated Flume amendment to go that way take the expense away from them encourage them to go this way here you could get the job creation if they're willing to do so is that a motion how do we do this this is a first I want to bring the appli up to make sure this is what our c plan changes will fixed what goes where so would be a motion to continue um to your next to your next to next meeting in in D City but I I assume the commissioner wants some Buy in that there'll be discussion over that I'd like to hear i' like to hear from the applicant onor we're talking about if we continue this item back and if we did a board initiated comprehensive plan amendment to go to a light industrial so you would have the expense of that we would take care of it yeah I did I wanted to talk to um my client about it and so if the continuance would be in order so we can try to get everybody comfortable with this idea and speak that would be fine I'd be happy with that they're unfortunately they're not they're traveling what's the next meeting and date C September September 3rd move to continue to September 3rd second and that would be at your 1:30 at the 130 meeting thank okay got a motion in a second um all those in favor say I I I I okay uh 5 so we will continue to September 3rd uh next item is this is p p64 yeah I don't think we need a presentation let's just have her uh announce it and then we'll vote on it because this is just a pastor right yeah well we'll do more than that because we go to some public hearing yeah Mr chairman you have approved the publication of this matter in the 10 B times July 28th of 2024 all right Amy frell um budget director with the office of manage management and budget for Pasco County item p64 or om 2441 is the BayCare Health System tax equity and fiscal responsibility act application in public hearing um if the chair would like to ask for any public comment okay anyone signed up no one signed up okay is anyone in anyone in the audience wish to speak to this item Mo we did have a uh reservation signed up but there is no one online at this time okay second the motion okay a motion second to approve all those in favor say I I I motion passes thank you five thank you that was the last item we have on here Mr chairman yes can I just bring up two quick items um well well I one I was trying to get an update in schol season well I want to get an update in the scholar season I did get it when they did the studies the only location they identified was an issue with Rabbid key which is immediately south of the enclo river once you enter the gulf so we should be close to getting some type of opening of the scalp season again uh I'm going to reach out to our state legislators as well as fish and wildlife to try to make that happen um and just

one of the one point I'd like to bring out I didn't think about it much but um the item we had on the tourist Development Council today I'm going to recommend that we go back to and especially on these big items that any any item that's going to come before the board especially anything like that magnitude should hit the tourist Development Council too and should hit before it gets to this Bo I mean we we we're pressuring the situation move quick and we should have the time set to where they can hear it they can bet it and then we can get a recommend recommendation from them so all I got okay Mr chairman just yes I know the clerk has something but um just for purpos of the record you consent 129 which was an addendum that was included in your consent agenda motion correct corre me correct yeah correct I just want I just want the board to realize that that's not that I'm being told what to do but correct my position has always been that if there's an addendum and it's an addendum as a consent item you approve it with your your consent item but I have that but I've had questions over the day about whether that has been so we cleared that up now yes okay thank you for for the record that was AC go ahead uh Mr chairman for the record um as we all know the County Administrator uh initiated a resolution for local state of emergency last week in response to uh the weather event um for the purposes of the record we would just like the board to note resolution number [Music] 2417 de uh uh declaring the state of emergency in Pasco County that was executed by the County Administrator as and included um as noted as part of this agenda approve second motion second all in favor say I I I okay thank you um anything else for the good other than the fact that I appreciate all our staff members all of our employees um things are going great in Pasco County and we certainly appreciate everything you all do so you know it's not easy at times but a lot of things are not easy but when you get to the end uh we're going to be a better County a better Premier County for for all of us so thank you that we J [Music] discharges are illegal contact Pasco County Department of Public work11 hi I'm Kurt Browning Pasco County Superintendent of Schools I lead the charge to provide a worldclass education for all students and sucess in college career and life however achieving this success can be difficult for the student who has been removed from their home for their own protection and placed in foster care or another out of home placement alarmingly right here in Pasco County there are almost 1,000 abused and neglected children in the child welfare system children in foster care often experience

multiple placements and consequently May attend several different schools in one school year making it difficult for them to achieve academic success what can you do you can help by becoming a guardian at Liam volunteer children who have a guardian at Lum do better in school and are more likely to find a safe permanent home sooner to learn how you can help call 727 834 3493 or visit hero to a child.org our children and their success matter to me I am for the child are [Music] you quality of customer service has been outstanding Beyond satisfied absolutely Beyond satisfied it's a completely different mindset it's a completely different approach the County's been taking extra care and working together with us and a team approach I think that pastel county has made strides in development of procedures and programs to where we have a relationship built with them so when I do call uh we have somebody that we know each other by name and we have an opportunity to get in front of our problem so important that the customer service within any organization evolves with its customers and I think Pasco County is doing a great job of that the other thing I've seen is that there's more interaction between the county staff in the community at large we have an opportunity to talk with people because we go to the vertical codes and the horizontal codes meeting looking at something and saying yes I can help you and I understand what you want to do and and I'm going to help you do it um that makes all the difference in the world listen in the past 5 years the changes that have come to the permitting Department the planning department the zoning department are completely different um just a breath of fresh air it's it's nice to walk in and see a smiling face and shake hands with someone and and then when you make a phone call and picking up the phone and and you're talking to someone and they're finding you answers and and they're getting you the answers that you want and you need it's just it's it's a great feeling all Commissioners all five Commissioners I know very well and they all have focused very hard on customer service the attitude is is that we are your customers and you need to be treated like a customer and that's exactly what Don Rosenthal says every time I hear him speak I think Pasco has a great future future of Pasco County is so bright it's it's in a perfect location it's right where you want to be it's exciting to help build the communities that we live and work in I think that Pasco County is going to lead the region I think one of the best decisions we've ever made is to better accommodate what we do for our clients in Pasco County and the County's staff has been the Keystone for that success [Music]