PDD-22-7526

Published agenda

4 appearances between Oct 26, 2021 and Jan 25, 2022, at 2 boards — continued 2 times.

OutcomeApproved by the Board of County Commissioners on Jan 25, 2022

Approved Staff’s recommendation with amended wording to include the alignment with Commissioner Moore and Commissioner Fitzpatrick voting nay.

Official title

Zoning Amendment (Regular) – Renner MPUD – Darrell A. and Karen J. Renner – Rezoning Request from A-C Agricultural District and AR-1 Agricultural Residential District to an MPUD Master Planned Unit Development District to Allow 108 Single-Family Detached Units on Approximately 50.15 Acres – South Central Pasco County, on the South Side of Bexley Road, Approximately 1 Mile West of the intersection of U.S. Highway 41 and Wisteria Loop

On a calendar

Oct 26, 2021 → Jan 25, 2022 · click a mark to jump to that appearance

Every appearance4 of 4 are in a recording

Each appearance carries the official title above. Where the county’s wording changed, the change is marked: added and ~~removed~~. Steps with no marks were worded identically.

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 73% of 747 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1Oct 26, 2021
Board of County CommissionersP67Public hearingContinued
Zoning Amendment ~~(Regular)~~ (Continuance) – Renner MPUD – … Mile West of the ~~intersection~~ Intersection of U.S. Highway 41 and Wisteria Loop
Approved minutes
Approved to continue the item to the December 7, 2021 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey which included the revision to the Agenda Memo that incorrectly stated the location was in Dade City.
Open this item →
1m
Ron OakleyChair
Okay, P sixty seven.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Item P67 was published in the Tampay Times on August 25, 2021. Item P67
Denise
is PDD 227526. This was actually advertised as a continuance, so the request is to continue, and I need to correct, make sure the memo is corrected. We did send the correction to the clerk's office. It is the continuance is to December 7th, 2021. At one thirty PM in Newport Ritchie, the memo incorrectly stated it was in Dade City. But it's twelve seven, twenty twenty one, one thirty New Port Richey. Okay.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Move to continue. Yeah. Dade time server. To December seventh. In Newport twenty twenty one, Newport Ricci. Yep.
Ron OakleyChair
Okay. Got a motion? Second. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed like sign. Okay. Pas five three long sixty eight.
2Nov 18, 2021
Planning CommissionP3Public hearingNo disposition in the minutes
Open this item →
41m
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Good day, Commission members, Chairman Messica Cole with Planning and Development Department. Item P3 is PDD 227526 in the name of Daryl and Karen Renner for a requested change in zoning from AR, Agricultural Residential District, to an MPUD Master Plan Unit Development District to allow for 108 single-family detached units on approximately 50.15 acres. Next slide. The property is located in south central Pasco
County on the south side of Bexley Road.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Can I stop you real quick?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Yes, absolutely.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Since this Planning Commission has already heard this item twice. I'm not sure you need to go through your full presentation. It was continued for a very specific reason, which is to deal with the roadway
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Correct.
Maybe you could just summarize for us where we are on that issue. Rather than going through unless the Planning Commission wants to hear this all over again.
Excellent.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yeah.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So after the Planning Commission heard this item on September thirtieth and it was continued to the November fourth meeting, the staff revised condition sixteen in accordance to the discussion that was had regarding the realignment of Westeria Loop to be in accordance with more of what the vision roads were showing in our PASCO Mapper tool. After the November fourth Planning Commission hearing, it was continued to this meeting. meeting, staff added condition seventeen to allow the applicant to seek mobility fee credits for the difference in cost from the substandard road improvements
to the realignment of Westeria Loop. I believe that's where we're at today. Staff is still recommending approval.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So Jessica just to be clear.
Staff is still recommending that the applicant build the vision road For credits.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Correct.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
I know that our transportation planners are on the line and they could probably speak to it a little bit better perhaps after the uh applicant's presentation, but they have been in discussion with the applicant to discuss some of the things that the applicant will be presenting as far as their solutions to the concerns over Wisteria Loop and the realignment.
Charles GreyChair
Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Thank you.
Charles GreyChair
All right. The applicant's present.
What
Thank you. Shelley Johnson, 6400 Madison Street, and I have been sworn. I'm not going to take up too much time and rehash everything, but um we did go back as we were requested at the last hearing and reviewed trying to straighten out that intersection on the existing Wisteria loop alignment. Um through that review we did determine that we've got about we thought it was a $914,000 worth of improvements on that road. We've got it's actually more closer to about $1.4 Um when you do the intersection over site and and Mike and Razor
and uh our engineers Mike Razor and Paul Skipmore are gonna provide more detail on that in a moment. Um we're talking about about $91,000 of additional improvement for the intersection to smooth that out. And so we're about 1.5. The client stands ready to do that improvement. I think it'll be a great improvement. Um so we did actually have some suggestions with regards to revisions to uh condition sixteen, but we'll talk about that a little later. And with that being said, I'm gonna turn it over to Mike.
Charles GreyChair
All right. Do we have a an aerial of w what you're how you're talking about doing it?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
I think Mr. Razor has a plan. Okay. I believe. I know he submitted one to staff.
What
I'm sorry David.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Well, the Chairman was asking whether you have a depiction of the PowerPoint. We do.
What
We have a PowerPoint and they're working on putting it up right now. I'm sorry. Um Mike's gonna go through Yeah, we have a lot of detail. No, I'm I just was letting you know we did go back and look at it, but Mike and and the other engineers obviously they're the experts, they're gonna get into the details on it for you. But we think it can be done. So
Denise at the very end, I think it's two eleven and twelve in the last slide that means.
Mike Razor
Uh good afternoon for the record. Uh Michael Razor, 19046, Bruce B. Domes of Olivar, Tampa, three three six four seven. Unfortunately, I came a little late and I have not been sworn.
Mm
mm mm.
Clerk
Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you God? I do. Thank you.
Christopher Poole
Excuse me. Thank you.
Mike Razor
So at the prior Planning Commission meeting we had heard uh a lot of iterations obviously about Bexley Road Wisteria Loop. Um upon the conclusion of the very last Planning Commission meeting, um there was a suggestion that uh we have evaluated, which was uh involving the intersection of Bexley Road and Wisteria Loop. Um there was a discussion regarding SKU of the intersection, safety, and and things of that nature. So we went back and we
took a look at it. And the diagram that is shown up on the screen is a conceptual improvement that will uh work to improve that intersection. Um Currently uh the through movement at the intersection is along Wisteria Loop. Um which is shown I'll generally uh is there a point is the pointer work? Top button. All right, perfect. So the the current alignment brings through movements generally along this path.
There's a stop control for for Bexley to turn left. And it there's a skew at the intersection. It's somewhat difficult to see on this particular graphic because of the new alignment being darker, but that skew is at about forty-five degrees. Requiring the motorist that is turning left from Bexley Road onto Worcester Loop North to look approximately 135 degrees over their shoulder to view oncoming traffic. Intersection angles less than 75 degrees should be avoided for traffic and safety, traffic
safety, and operational reasons. The improvement here creates a traditional 90-degree intersection, significantly reducing the potential for adverse. traffic and safety or traffic safety and operational issues. Further, the improvement uh makes Bexley Road to Wisteria Loop North as the through movement.
So with this concept the through movement is here, which will take you out to 41, which will tend to discourage traffic intrusion into the southerly neighborhood, further enhanced, of course, with the with the signage to US 41, with the arrow to follow the curvature of the road.
The support Four, the modification to the intersection lies within the uh F DOT plans uh design manual, rather, they change the name of that. Um FDOT indicates that the intersection angle between two roadways has a significant influence on the safety and operation of an intersection. Intersection angles that are close to 90 degrees as practical should be uh constructed. Intersection angles less than 75 degrees should be avoided for For the following reasons. Heavy SKU angles increase the intersection crossing length, exposing
vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists to conflicting traffic streams for longer periods of time. The road user's sight angle to the crossing leg becomes restricted due to the SKU, making it difficult to see conflicting vehicles and to perceive safe crossing gaps. Turning movements are difficult because of the SKU. Turning movements or positioning may be confusing, and increased open pavement areas of skewed intersections increase maintenance costs. So the intersection improvement. here can be constructed with an existing right-of-way.
meets applicable site distance requirements, and provides for additional landscaping areas as shown in green. Here.
Um The the intersection improvement is currently being proffered to discussions held at prior planning commission meetings. However, um for the record I'm unaware of any documented safety and or crash issue at this intersection. It didn't surface in any of my prior discussions with county staff. Um Uh with that I'd be happy to answer any traffic related questions regarding the intersection improvement and my prior comments at the my comments at the prior uh Planning Commission uh hearings in regard to the traffic
study and its findings of course still stand it'd be happy to answer any questions regarding that as well. Thank you.
Charles GreyChair
Yeah, so we have a question.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So Mike the I know you said that you can do this with an existing right away. I'm seeing that there's it looks like you have to make some adjustment to a driveway. That driveway is entirely within County Rideaway?
Mike Razor
I'm going to ask Paul Skidmore to come up and uh respond to that question specifically. He put this uh this diagram together. Uh I believe I know the answer to that, but I'd rather have Paul answer specifically.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
It's
all
Sheriff
right.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Paul Skidmore with Florida Land Design and Permitting, Three Thirty Thirty Trinity Boulevard, uh Trinity. I'm sorry, Starkey Boulevard in Trinity. I have been sworn. The improvements will fit within the existing right-of-way. The dark, heavy lines on the outside are the right-of-way lines. Um
Unidentified speakerVoice B
And so that's right away the
Unidentified speakerVoice C
driveway presently ties into the sweeping movement to the south. and it would need to be extended over into the new uh lane that would be the T intersection.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
And so this is right away that the county owns by deed or maintenance or how I mean,
Unidentified speakerVoice C
uh it's uh either by plat or by deed. Okay. In this area and it's uh I believe it's a sixty foot right away right now. Uh as you get closer to forty one I believe it jumps to seven. So
Unidentified speakerVoice B
what is this landscaping that you're proposing? 'Cause you're showing the
Unidentified speakerVoice C
light. This landscaping was going to be put up uh for people traveling uh west to east. When they're making the turn, headlights then would not be able to we could put landscaping high enough to prevent headlights from shining into the adjacent properties.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Well, I'm only asking for clarity as to what you're proposing because landscaping could be just be grass. I don't know what you're I mean, I don't know what you're proposing there. So what are you proposing?
Unidentified speakerVoice C
We can put up shrubs, we could put up trees. Uh but landscaping is not just the grass. So it's some type of buffer that would prevent Headlights from shining into the people's homes. And those homes that are in there right now are more almost six hundred feet off of that right-of-way line. So there is a very large distance that would uh prevent these lights from reaching there.
Charles GreyChair
So should we have a minimum height?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
first of all I'm not sh I don't know whether Planning Commission is going to agree with this or not, but I if you do I think it needs more specific spor specificity about what landscaping is being installed and that
It doesn't address verbally What this landscaping is going to be. So Again, I Probably need to hear from the public before you make a decision, but
All I'm saying is that if you agree to this you probably need you c you can't just refer to this graphic 'cause the graphic
Unidentified speakerVoice C
It's a generic graphic to show you, but we can you know, the buffer that we put in there can be of some type of opaque type type uh uh vegetation.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So Paul, I guess the Chair just asked me a question which I will ask you. The southern on the southern part of this graphic
It looks like you there's a piece that's outside of the right of way, or
Unidentified speakerVoice C
am
Unidentified speakerVoice B
I
Unidentified speakerVoice C
the existing road presently is outside of the right-of-way.
In mi in uh several cases.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay, well let's back up though. Is it is it a county maintained road?
Unidentified speakerVoice C
That is correct.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay, well then the county would own it by maintenance. So I guess when you get south of this point, you're just gonna be building within the You're still within the are you within the area that we're maintaining? Is that what uh
Unidentified speakerVoice C
all of the road this all of these roads are maintained by Pasco County?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay. You're not doing any construction outside of any right of way we either owned by Platt Or by maintenance. Okay.
Did I answer your question?
Charles GreyChair
Yeah. Yeah, I just wanna. Looked like it was going right into somebody's heart. Right. Okay. Do we have any questions up here before they What we hear from the uh cup public. Yeah. Oh okay. Thank you.
All right, is there anybody that like to come up and ask questions, have a concern, or like to speak?
Denise
Mr. Chair, you do have some folks signed up signed up to speak on this item. You've got Mr. Chris Knocko, Mr. Jeremy Couch. Um some of these are very difficult to read, so I apologize. Miss Debbie and Miss Shannon.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Town. Pennys, do we have anybody on WebEx for this item?
Denise
We do not have anyone on WebEx for this item.
Charles GreyChair
Okay. So Mr. Nacko would you like to come speak?
Sheriff
Chris Nacko, [address removed]. I am here as a private citizen. I want to make sure private citizen of the county. So I I'm standing here on objection to this project. I I don't believe they should not they should be able to build homes one day. I I think one day they should be able to build homes. But not today, not with this. in place for several reasons. This is part of a bigger project the the Angeline. If you look at the whole Angeline project, this actually will tie into it because of Bexley Road. If we don't address the Vision
Road, how these roads are gonna impact the entire community. We're creating more micro problems that create macro issues. So this is a micro problem for us people who live in that area. It's going to create keep constantly creating micro issues. Right here, if you don't mind, I'm gonna step over for a second. second.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
There's a
Donald E. Anderson
there's a pointer.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Can we give it a power sophisticated?
Charles GreyChair
Yeah, Chris. What's that? No, I use this. Oh
Sheriff
that's right. So at the bottom of the screen right there. Thank you, Chair. At the bottom of the screen where it stops That goes in with steering gardenia. Those roads. This area right here is wider than that area. That's gravel. R I didn't realize the county maintains it. There's potholes everywhere, but I don't think people who care live there care. This will absolutely impact it. So As we're looking at this project, I mean at first there was discussion a couple weeks ago about building that vision road in there. That vision road would have helped The macro issues, because
we're planning ahead for the Angeline project. It will be coming through. There's train tracks, there's a legitimate place where CSX will allow people to pass. If we ston't don't address those issues now. We never will. All it's going to do is create more congestion, more heartaches. It's going to continue to address and be an issue for people living at in that area. So that's why I object to this program. I don't object to building houses, but build the houses when the roads are in place, when everything is ready to go. because this when the Angeline project comes before you and we're
talking about roads, this is gonna be impacted and this is a band aid on a gashing wound We gotta deal with the gashing wound first before we address it before we put it try to put a band-aid on it. So is that? I appreciate it. Thank you all very much.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Thank you.
So Are you saying you're opposed to the project or you're only would support it if you're not going to be able to do The Vision Road is built. I was
Sheriff
trying
Unidentified speakerVoice B
to figure out which which which is it.
Sheriff
I I I I don't agree with this project as it is right now. If there were if there were other issues that would take care of the Vision Road and then also would address where it goes with Stiria and then addresses into Gardenia, that's another problem that needs to be addressed. So my my thing would be Let's have a master plan for the entire road system. That will address up through Bexley, especially where the railroad crossing is. If you if please, I would say if you're going to take a field trip, take a field trip out there to see it. Because as a county and
I know federal funding just came through is gonna be coming through through the state of Florida. We should use that money to address from the Ridge Road extension all the way to 41 to see how these things can all connect together because if not, we're just gonna keep doing little band-aids that are gonna ruin communities, but in reality we can plan ahead. And create roads that will be sophisticated enough to handle all this traffic and to handle everything going forward.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Just wanna be clear then. 'Cause staff that's why I asked staff the question, what are they recommending? Staff is recommending That the vision road be built. You're saying that even with that condition you'd still be opposed to this project?
Sheriff
I would be opposed to that project. It would be a positive step forward. But even with that I I would disagree because I think there's other issues that need to be addressed first.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay, thank you.
Sheriff
Thank you all very much.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Thank you.
Hmm.
project engineer
Members of the commission, Jeremy Couch, [address removed]. Um You know, my main opposition to the project. Um is not the neighborhood. It's not that Mr. Renner wants to develop his property into a neighborhood. We want the right road. You know, when you look at the section there which I didn't hear any evidence that that was a good idea. Construction is actually on property that the county owns. It looks like it's off. Um But
If you look at the eighty foot wide vision road, You know, this planning commission made a decision two weeks ago. that recommended on Clark. Clark gave the right of way. the ponds are there, the path is there. If you look at the eighty foot typical section. That's what our county needs. Not a twenty foot b twenty two foot band aid. Um What's gonna happen is if if the road's not built now The county's gonna have to pay to build it. or some
other applicant in some future time period will be here. saying, hey, why should we build the vision road? Let's just use Wisteria. and it's not going to be the right improvement. So I support the project with them building the Vision Road. Thank you.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So I'll ask you the same question then. So You support staff's recommendation then?
project engineer
I support staff's recommendation. I mean you guys have given them mobility fee credits. You know, if you're gonna build so you know the argument for this neighborhood is that it's res three. They come up and says res three. Urban infill area, this is where the county wants to grow Res III. That's fine if you have the infrastructure to support that. And doing a substantial road improvement's not enough. It's not like this is on 41 or on a collector road. It's a little teeny tiny road. And so we're gonna widen it to get back there. That's great.
I'm gonna give you some other evidence, uh testimony. Immediately south of where their improvement ends, I'd say A month and a half ago. A tractor trailer. came up from the south, hit the corner too hard, doing a big delivery, and it got flipped over in the ditch and had to be get pulled out the next day, and then the county had to come in and patch the road. So There is absolutely a safety issue south of here. Um I come up from the south and a lot of people come up from the south. That's not been addressed. If the Vision
Road is built as shown,
I don't think you're gonna have those issues coming from the south. Really it just needs to be built. I mean let's do it the right way. Let's not put it on the county. You know,
Charles GreyChair
thank you. Yep, thanks.
Anyone else like to speak?
All right. Shelley, do you have uh there's
Christopher Poole
two other
Charles GreyChair
speakers.
Denise
There are two other people that are signed up. Um Ms. Debbie, last name starts with a K and Ms. Shannon and I cannot tell what the last name starts with.
Yes, and we were
Tanglewood. Okay. Is is Shannon also for Tanglewood? Thank you. That's a
Charles GreyChair
All right, thank you. Uh Shelley.
What
Denise, if you could put up the last slide on the PowerPoint, I think that's has our proposed condition.
Oh I'm sorry. I forgot about that. There we go. Thank you. Thanks me, sorry. And I have a hard copy too, but this is the proposed r um revision that we're suggesting to Our actual proposed conditions, we're going back to the original condition that staff proposed, because as of you recall, staff's original recommendation was that we build it in the existing alignment. So we are going back to that original condition and then we're adding the intersection improvement to that that we're agreeing to make to actually make it even better in terms of the improvements we're making to the road. Um and
then there's a condition 17 that deals with impact fee credits, which obviously when we looked at the other alignment, you know, that didn't work from a cost perspective. So Um we would look to have that deleted because there we don't, you know, we're not we're seeking impact fee credits for the additional uh improvements that we're making. But we'll be happy to answer any questions.
Charles GreyChair
Okay. Are there any questions?
Uh having seen that
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
I've got I mean I do have several questions here. Um as far as the mobility fee credits go, I mean Is there a can you quantify the amount of mobility fee credits that would be available and then how many would be used by the project?
What
So the the improvement project on the on the vision road, which I m my understanding too is there's no route study. So I don't know if that the actual alignment's gonna change on the Vision Road once a route study's done with that class one wetland, but the original cost estimates we came up with was $2.8 million to build that road. Um and we have 108 units. So we would be able to take down maybe less than, you know uh about a uh less than a million of 'em obviously, 'cause that you know, it's probably about a million. Um and then we had talked to Clark about taking some
down and you know, hadn't had an agreement on that which we discussed last time. So Um There's not enough there, yeah, in terms of what's in the benefit district or otherwise. So but on this we still have another additional five hundred thousand dollars of improvements that we're adding because we've got we're up to I said I think one point four on this, um and then when you add the intersection improvement, which is additional, um that's another ninety-one thousand is the rough estimate on that. So we're up to about one point five million to do improvements to the existing line.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
The difference between the two point eight and the one point five would be the amount that's creditable? Correct. Is that right? Correct. So there would be so you wouldn't be able to use up that whole one point three?
What
No, and we uh as we discussed last time, you can only use them in the benefit district and right now there's nothing on the horizon immediately that we would be able to say, okay, we can make this work. So
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Mm-hmm. Yeah, I mean I Yeah, I know we We've heard this multiple times and and the idea or everybody's intent I think was not to rehash and go over everything but I mean just to summarize going all the way back to the first meeting The concerns that I heard were The substandard road portion of Bexley, the substandard road portion of Wisteria Loop. both to the I'll call north, but I think it's east and west or whichever direction going both directions from uh Bexley. Um D the diversion of traffic
going to the south and that that was substandard, there wasn't enough width there? Um I think in my opinion I think a lot of these are addressed with this proposed condition That they're not going to be able to do improve and bring up the standard Bexley and Wesley loop out to forty one. They've diverted the traffic to where less traffic movements and and
route to send people to the south down um Wisteria Loop. Um I just I think these people are I mean it's a hundred and eight units and I think they're getting saddled with a huge burden to do a vision road that hasn't even my understanding even been fully planned and vetted. as far as a route study goes and to saddle them with the full brunt of the improvements is is asking them to take a big bite of the apple for something that in my opinion should be done by the county.
Mm.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Well could I just clarify one point though? You don't necessarily need a route study to build a road within an M P U D. So The M P developer could establish that route as part of their You do a route study when the county's going to build the road. if the Clark M P D or the Renner M PD were building the road they can help design that route. It doesn't necessarily have to be a route stuff.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Yeah, I I guess my point here is is we don't really even know and I don't think they know fully what all of the Ramifications and implications of putting the road through the class one wetland. um through the through the area that they're gonna be tasked with putting the road through. I just think it's a big burden to ask of them and that that's it's my opinion.
School District Representative
Anyone else? I don't know. On the other hand, sometimes I see a lot of times with the counties the last one in is the last guy in is usually the guy that's gotta fix everything. So there's like two sides of the coin. The first guy, I mean, do you want to do it up front or do you want to do it at the end? But it seems like well a lot of times we just do it at the end and the last guy in is the guy that's a good idea. Bayon the Brun.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
I believe that we cannot expect to do it at the end. I believe we need to have the right infrastructure in order to approve this type of development. What I see is that we don't have it. We don't have a clear path of how the road will be or how what we need it. I see the the road that is planning is the efficiency. Um Honestly, I don't against any c type of uh apartment complex, multi use. Uh I totally support those when they are well planning and we had infrastructure that can cover the minimums and
safety is one of those issues that we have here. I hear that the road will be done enough that will provide a lot of traffic, no just Cars. people who walk and I don't see how we can Approach this.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Yeah, I I guess my my only point on that is i if if this is the only project and this is the last project in in this area using these roads. This discussion of the vision road would not even be out there. The vision roads being discussed because of all the other future and potential uses, the Angeline project Vexley, all the other things that are are gonna in the future use this road.
So I mean th they're making an interim improvement to that intersection to address today's concerns with the loading that they're gonna produce on that road.
Charles GreyChair
Any comment?
School District Representative
I guess well how do you get there then if
But they're not gonna pay for it. I guess that's the question, how do you get there?
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Well well, I I mean to me I think that comes back to The question of I mean how do Vision Roads get built? I mean they do they get built with people paying mobility fees that are using them?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So I would say in general. Vision roads get built. either by developers or the county. So the county does its best to as development occurs Ensure that developers build the portions of the vision road that that development should be responsible for and then But sometimes we have gaps that then the county has to come. A good example would be Tower Road. Okay. Tower Road's a vision road. There's portions of Tower Road that the Bexley has built. There's portions of Tower Road
that the Starkey Ranch M P U D had built. But there are gaps that that will likely need to be built by the county, but eventually you'll have a continuous roadway Yeah. So This road is very similar. I mean you could have parts of this road that are built by Bexley up to the railroad tracks. And then when you get over the railroad tracks Did it we we try to get development to build as much of it as we could, but to the extent we couldn't, the county would eventually have to fill
in those gaps. Does that answer your question?
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Mm-hmm. Yeah.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
And the funding source we would use would be mobility fees. So That's why the county was willing to gr give mobility fee credits for this road if it was built because It is saving us money that we eventually would have to spend mobility fees on.
Christopher Poole
Okay.
Charles GreyChair
Chris, anything? Don?
Christopher Poole
Okay. But what's the dude and so how what's the window to use the mobility fee credits? I mean is there when do they sunset? Is it a five year old? No, but
Unidentified speakerVoice B
as long as they're being used, there is no sunset. If they're If they lay dormant long enough, and I think it's twenty years, then they would expire. But but if they're being actively used, they don't expire.
Christopher Poole
So the growth in that area obviously they're gonna be used within that within that window.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yeah, I mean, I know that Ms. Johnson said there they may not be a market for them Мирилы и бэ. I'm not sure it's accurate to say there's no future growth plan that could use them in this area. I mean Lynn Angeline is a huge project that could buy credits, Clark M Puty. There's there's a number of projects coming in this area that could be bu potential buyers of credits. So it's not like it's an area where there's No growth occurring.
Charles GreyChair
Okay. Uh So we've had discussion? There's no further discussion. Uh we have a motion.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
I move a motion to deny it P three.
Charles GreyChair
Are you move a m move a motion to deny it totally or go establishing
Unidentified speakerVoice D
conditions? We can have conditions and those conditions is to improve the road and have a clear plan of how the road will look. How it is right now, I don't see that can
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So to be clear, staff's clear about what staff's recommendation is. Staff's recommendation is to approve the project w and require the construction of the Vision Road. Four credits.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
I understand that, but do we have uh clear plans of how the the road will be designed, built, with
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Well that would be between the developers of the Renner MPUD and the developers of the Clark M PUD. The Clark M PUD does show a proposed alignment for this road. But if the Since Clark MPUD has to give the right away for it and and Renner M M P had to build it. they can jointly agree on a revised alignment, Um So that'd be done through the design process. The condition as written, according to staff's recommendation, simply requires the construction of the road. It
doesn't require a specific alignment. Mm-hmm.
Charles GreyChair
All right. Are you look please clarify your motion?
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Again. Yes, they clarify I keep my motion and I can say that can be flexible, it can see exactly how the road will be built. If I have a master plan that is consistent with the number of units and the future of the area So That is my position. And I don't have it.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So you you so that your motion's for denial?
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Mm-hmm.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay.
Charles GreyChair
Okay, we so we have a motion for denial. Is there a second uh motion?
Not hearing a second, then do we have a a new motion? That motion died for lack of a second.
School District Representative
I have a question on so condition seventeen is is that the building of Division Road?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So Jessica, do you have a PowerPoint or something that you can show us? 'Cause we Shelley's showing what she proposed. Do you have something that shows what staff is recommending? Because they think that would be helpful.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
David, while she's pulling that up, just for my clarification, as far as mobility fee credits and if they're unable to use the mobility fee credits, I think we already established and talked about last time. that they can sell those mobility fee credits, correct?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yeah, in fact the condition says that. Jessica could put it up, it but I think it's the condition that's also in your packet. So
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
does does that does the onus of selling those go on the developer or is that something if somebody else comes in And the county says, hey, there's mobility fee credits out there, go see Renter.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
It's generally on the developer. There's one area of the county which is villages villages of Pasadena Hills where we do have to tell them to go see somebody else 'cause it has a credit registry process, but that's a unique to Bas Pasina Hills. The rest of the county would be on the developer to find a buyer. But it's possible other developers would approach them, but I but we don't require other developers to approach them if that makes sense. Mm-hmm.
So
Charles GreyChair
But do you have a depiction of it?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So Sixteen and seventeen are what staff's recommending and the difference is that between this and what the applicants proposing Is is letter B and sixteen. It says construct new real line with stereo loop section of the roadway within the Clark M PD. And then condition seventeen talks about credits for that realigned Roadway. So B is a vision road essentially. B is the sixteen B is the vision road. Right. Now but it doesn't say I
mean we could show you the proposed I mean I don't know if we have it, Jessica, the proposed alignment that Clark MPD showed for that road. But it doesn't necessarily have to follow that alignment.
Jessica, do you have a graphic that shows where the Cork M P D showed that road?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Our PowerPoint had it in it. Yeah, if you if you can go to the applicant's PowerPoint, they do have um one of the f it was like the second, I believe, slide. Shows the alignment through the Clark and PUD.
And you might yeah, it's this next one. It'll be on the
What
last
Unidentified speakerVoice A
three.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yeah, that's it. The yell if you look at that yellow section of the roadway. That's where the Clark I believe where the Clark M P D shows the road going. If Clark MPUD and Renner MPUD wanted to come up with a s different alignment that achieves the same goal. I don't think the county would object. Do you Brad, do you have
Charles GreyChair
Oh yeah. Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay.
Charles GreyChair
Yeah, I think that helps to clarify it.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
But essentially to bo to boil down all those cr the that language it basically says They'd have to build the yellow road. for and they would get credits for the difference between the cost of doing that And improving the existing alignment.
Christopher Poole
So the credits would be specific to B, not A or C in that condition sixteen essentially.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
It's specific to B. Right. Because that 'cause the other segment the other parts of the road they have to improve anyway. Anyway. They're not they're not nobody's disputing the other segments of the road because There is no different alignment. Those just need to be improved, if that makes sense.
Christopher Poole
It does. Yeah.
Charles GreyChair
Alright, so We have a good understanding of that. Do we have a motion, please?
Donald E. Anderson
Okay. Yeah.
Motion. in light of a lack of second. I'll make a motion to um accept the proposal and recommendation of the staff. to include division right in the uh
Charles GreyChair
Okay, so we have a uh a motion to approve staff's mic recommendation. with their conditions. Gotta have a second.
School District Representative
I'll second it.
Charles GreyChair
Okay, we have a uh proposal to approve SAS recommendation with conditions and we have a second. Any further discussion of that motion?
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Yeah, I mean I I guess just before we vote, I mean just I I I guess in essence what what I'm hearing or the way I'm interpreting this up here is that This project essentially gets penalized because it's not big enough. And if it was a bigger project, they could absorb the cost as mobility fee credits. Um unfortunately just due to the size of the project it's it's not big enough to absorb those mobility fee and the impacts and and all the costs associated with the construction of the Vision Road. So I mean it's a This is a hard one because
I mean
We're usually up here to say whether we're for a project or against the project. I don't know that I've Ever voted? against the project 'cause it was too small. Um So that's right.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Well I will say that.
I understand this may be unique.
for Pasco, but i part of the reason the legislature changed the law to make it So that you have to be able to sell The county has to allow them to sell any excess credits in the same benefit district. So part of the reason the legislature changed the law was for this very reason. There there are small or there are some projects that weren't big enough in the state to absorb all their credits and so the legislature wanted to make sure that they'd get some use of those credits, that they'd be able to sell those credits in their s in the same benefit
district. And or an adjacent benefit district if it provides benefits to an adjacent area. So
It It may seem uncommon to you, but I wouldn't say it's uncommon in the state of Florida. Otherwise the legislature wouldn't have changed the law the way they did. Because there wouldn't be excess credits to to sell. So
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Yeah, and I guess along those same lines if I mean really what the way I look at it is personally I I I have trouble burdening them burdening them with the costs of constructing the Vision Road. However, if they're approved without having to construct the Vision Road, they don't have to pay even what I would consider as their proportionate sh share or their fair share to the construction of the vision road. So Um
my point of thinking on this isn't right either. So
Unidentified speakerVoice B
the other thing the other thing I would add just You know, I can understand why Mr. Couch is taking the position that he is because
If you don't You have to understand that if they just paid us 'cause they don't get credit, build the road and get credits, they're just gonna pay us mobility fees. And that means it's just gonna go into the county's general pot of mobility fees. That's probably not the road we would build in the from that general pot. I'm just being honest with you. So it is it is a way to do it. If you're Mr. Couch it is a way to ensure that He gets an improvement that's been gonna benefit this area as opposed to a going Somewhere else in in the benefit district.
But I understand your point too.
I'm just yeah. I'm just telling you that that the the facts.
Donald E. Anderson
Yep. I don't disagree with Jamie's comments. The economics of it for a hundred and eight units. To bear the the burden, but I don't see a way to reconcile.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Right.
Donald E. Anderson
what we want in a future site.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Mm-hmm.
Charles GreyChair
All right, so if there are no further comments, we have a motion and a second. And if there's no further discussion. Uh all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Aye.
Charles GreyChair
Are you opposed? Aye. And opposed?
Unidentified speakerVoice D
One. Yes.
Charles GreyChair
Okay. So the motion carries one one nay.
3Dec 7, 2021
Board of County CommissionersP124Public hearingContinued
Approved minutes
Approved to continue the item to the January 25, 2022 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey.
Open this item →
1h 1m
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
P one twenty four.
Unidentified speakerVoice E
Item P one twenty four was published in the Tampa Times on August 25th, 2021.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Chair Members. Jessica Cole with the Planning and Development Department. There have been some expartes sent to the clerk's office pertaining to this petition. Item P124 is PDD 227526 in the name of Daryl and Karen Renner for a requested change in zoning from AC Agricultural District and AR1 Agricultural Residential District to MPUD Mass. Master Plan Unit Development District to allow for 108 single-family detached units on approximately 50.15
acres. The property is located in south-central Pasco County, on the south side of Bexley Road, approximately one mile west of the intersection of U.S. Highway 41 and Wisteria Loop. The western parcel of the subject site reflects its original AC zoning district, and the eastern parcel was approved for rezoning by the BCC from AC to AR1 on January 12, 1977. The parcels have a future LAN use classification of res3. The
subject site contains a residential dwelling unit and agricultural pursuits. It is in the central market area, yet is outside the urban service, expansion, and rural areas. The Planning Commission heard this item on september thirtieth, and after discussions required regarding required improvements to the wisteria loop and the realignment thereof, the commission approved the motion to continue the item to to the November seventh meeting. On November seventh, the Planning Commission heard the item and after further discussions
regarding the necessary improvements for the realignment of Westeria Loop, the Commission approved the motion to further continue the item to the November eighteenth Planning Commission meeting. At the November eighteenth meeting. The Planning Commission approved the conditions of approval that you see in your packet to require the applicant to improve segments of the Wisteria Loop uh Bexley Road as substandard at the project's entrance to the realignment of Wisteria Loop. to construct the Vision Road of Wisteria
Loop and then further substandard roadway improvements to the east up to US 41 except for the areas that are already approved to be done by others.
After the Planning Commission discussion on September 30th, staff revised condition 16 to require the MPUD, the renter MPUD, to construct the improvements previously noted. This realignment goes through the Clark M PUD that was approved earlier in this meeting.
At the October 26th BCC meeting, the board directed staff to ensure conditions of approval for MPUD rezoning petitions require a minimum of one lot tree in the front yard, a variety of architectural features to prevent monotony, and a restriction in the number of front-loaded 40-foot-wide lots. This petition is not requesting 40-foot-wide lots. 50-foot-wide lots are being proposed. Condition number 13 addresses the placement of lot trees. Prior to this board's directive, the applicant had proposed a condition that would require four
different architectural home designs dispersed throughout the proposed development to address the architectural monotony. Staff did subsequently revise that condition, it's currently condition number 44, to further align with the board's directive. Condition number 17 was added after the Planning Commission's discussion at the November 4th meeting to allow the project to receive mobility fee credits for the additional cost of design, permitting, and construction of the realignment portion of Bexley Road Wisteria Loop through the Clark MPUD, in the event that the Planning
Commission andor the Board of County Commissioners required the applicant to construct the realigned portion of Bexley Road Wisteria Loop. through the Clark M PUD. This condition will be deleted if the board at this hearing does not impose this requirement.
At the November eighteenth Planning Commission hearing, the commission did vote in favor five to one with Chairman M Uh recusing himself from the vote.
This is a present presentation of their proposed
Unidentified speakerVoice F
master plan. Wrong project. I was planning commission. Wrong people.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Yeah, I think that was R Roberto that is he chairman of no. That's Mr. Gray. So I think Roberto Sayaz um voted no and Gray voted, right? No?
Unidentified speakerVoice F
Gray recruised himself, didn't he? No.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
No, you are correct. They voted five to one with Roberto saying no, you're I did not yes. No, you are absolutely correct. I apologize. Thank you for correcting that. Okay. I thought you meant I was on the wrong slide. Now I've lost myself. Yeah, that's right.
Mike Moore
The Chairman recuse himself from a
Unidentified speakerVoice A
tangled
Mike Moore
upcoming project on the agenda.
Correct.
Correct.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Well I've lost my presentation, so I apologize folks. Um however the proposed petition has been identified as being consistent with the land development code, the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan, and it does come to you with a staff and planning commission recommendation of approval subject to the conditions of approval in your packet.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Um I I need you to go over those conditions of approval. You right with that?
Jack Mariano
Oh yeah, go over. I want to see the vision row too
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
fully described. I think we need to dig into this a little more. I
Unidentified speakerVoice A
would you like the applicant to do their presentation first?
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Thank you.
What
Thank you. Madam Chairman, Commissioner Shelley Johnson, 6400 Madison Street and I have been sworn. We have a PowerPoint. I don't know if we can because I I I'm gonna try to be quick because I know you guys have a lot on your agenda this afternoon, but Um so I will try to be brief. But um this this we are I have been sworn, I think I told you that this is um The Renner MPD and the vicinity around the Renner MPD, I think some of you have already seen this. As you can see, our MPD, the Renner MPD, is this little purple MPD here with 108
units. The actual property is on the existing alignment of Wisteria Loop, which we've talked to with a lot of you about. You can see that existing alignment. The R MPD, which has already been approved by you, is likewise on that existing alignment. They are 130 units and they have actually been approved, and they're doing improvements to, they did improvements to the existing Wisteria Loop. Um and that was what you required them to do. We went into the Renner MPD with 108 units. We had a recommendation
of approval going into the Planning Commission that we were going to be able to improve the existing alignment, bring it up to standard, which is what we intended to do and are still agreeing to do, obviously. I think staff and all the engineers have looked at it and I haven't heard otherwise, but it can be brought up standard. There's sufficient right-of-way there for it. And so we are proposing still to do that. That was when we went into the actual Planning Commission meeting and that's when things seemed to kind of go sideways. There was an initial question, and if we can move forward, I'm not really sure how to do that. Can
you go to slide? One other thing I wanted to mention, because I do think it's important on the Renter MPD, we actually have a vision road on our property, a north-south one that we have um it's been requested that we build. Um and provide the right-of-way for, which we in fact have are doing as you can see, and so that's on our plan. Um so we have that in addition to our substandard road improvements on the existing posterior loop access alignment. Could you go down to the next one, do you mind? And that's just a it shows our road again. And then the next one I think will be there,
yeah, there we go. Okay, so as you can see, when we went into Planning Commission, we had staff support that we complied with the code, bring the existing alignment up to code, and we were fine with that. We could bring it up to standard. As you can see, this is the existing alignment, and where that little star is, you'll see the existing alignment actually skirts what is a pristine class. One wetland on the Clark MPD property, the one you just um approv approved earlier. Um ultimately what We were being asked to do at the Planning
Commission is to actually build the new alignment, the new Vision Road alignment, on the Clark property versus coming into compliance and complying with the code and building on the existing alignment, which we could do. The existing alignment costs is around $900 and some thousand dollars, which we were fine with obviously doing. Ultimately, somehow it got sideways the Planning Commission, and the next thing we know, we were being asked to build a three, almost three, two point seven, two point eight million dollar road, vision road, on this little little for
this little 108-unit MPD on somebody else's property in order to get access. Our access on this renter property, and I know the renters are here, those the homeowners, they that the This is the access that's been used for that property since the beginning. You know, that's the access people use. There's no access south on this for the renter property. Our only access is the existing alignment, which I do think is really important. Nevertheless, the Planning Commission, we we talked about, you know, impact fee credits and
all kinds of things in terms of you know how we could offset costs, but we were dealing with such a large cost for such a small development. It just from an equitable persp perspective, it we didn't understand why we were being singled out, but nevertheless, it wasn't something that we could make from a cost perspective work. We've ac actually looked at doing it farther, going a little bit farther south on the alignment. And you can see the the red is the actual vision road alignment. The blue is the existing. And you can see that the red goes right through that class one wetland. So outside of cot,
we looked at like I was saying we looked at an additional route to kind of go a little bit further south. We had talked to staff about that and staff Um we we did actually look at it. So by it's still we're still looking at about $2.1 million. So we went from 2.7 to 2.1. Um if we had to build the vision road alignment. Um, but we're still, you know, we're still we still got a gap that we have have no way of making up. And again, the traffic impact fees, we we did look at that. I mean, the ones, the offers that we got from a timing perspective and from a a takedown perspective
on the schedule of how many we could be taking down at a certain amount of time, it just doesn't work for this little development. That's the issue. It almost is like we're being punished for being small. But we're building within our existing land use. So ultimately we we went to Planning Commission, we explained all this to them. Outside of all that issue, we have this wetland. It is a class one wetland. And what we are being told and we share this with Planning Commission is that we are looking at permitting through DEP and at best case scenario we're looking at two years. I mean, this
is 108 units. We were planning on probably, you know, going to site planning, going to plating, and then being under construction maybe in the summer, if at all possible. So to wait two or three years or to bond this road for two or three years in order to get access to our property and to be able to develop is just inequitable. It's just not how developments are treated and have been treated. Because we have access, we have an alignment, we can bring it up to standard. None of the experts have told us otherwise that we cannot. We've actually added, if you if you don't mind
going back one more to the intersection, we actually at the Planning Commission. uh added a an intersection improvement because there was questions raised about whether or not that could you know be straightened out and so we did actually add that improvement um and no impact fee credits for that. We don't need to do that in order to bring the road up to standard. according to the experts, but we've added that as an addition to try to meet everybody halfway and get something nice out there for everybody while this, you know, so this little development can get can go forward. Subsequent to
Planning Commission, we've now offered and we've provided the proposed condition to staff to also prepay our impact fee. Um the idea being that we'll we'll prepare impact fee so that money can go into a fund. of the counties choosing um and then ultimately if somebody comes along um and whether it be Bexley North, whether it be another development that comes online that triggers it, you know, there'll be money there so that that vision road can ultimately be built. But for us, you know, the $1.3 million improvement that we're willing to do to the
existing alignment is what we truly believe we're legally required to do. We feel like we're trying to go above and beyond by putting in the intersection improvement, go above and beyond by prepaying the impact fees. I just don't know that there's anything else that this little development can put on the table to make this work. Um You know, maybe if there was just a cost issue, maybe that wouldn't have been a problem. But we have a class one wetland permitting issue. So and maybe if there wasn't a class one wetland permitting issue, you know, there still would be a cost issue, but if this was a bigger development, it could have
phased it. I mean we've we've looked at all that. Um it's just a small development. It's just not something that, you know, from you know, you're trying to to sh stick the square peg in the round hole for this development, and it's not something that I think it's required to do. I don't think the code requires it. I think the code specifically permits us to improve our existing access. Um as long as we can. And so, you know, we would ask for your support. We again we're we're putting on the table the additional prepayment of impact fee. I know many of you know about that. We have provided the actual proposed condition to staff.
Um but we would request support. I do have uh obviously our whole team is here to answer any questions, but we do request support to be able to. Build, improve, and bring to standard the existing alignment of Westeri Loop per the code. Um we had staff's micro recommendation of approval for that, and now we've added more stuff on the table. I don't necessarily know that staff doesn't still support that. proposal because it is within your code. Um and now we've you know obviously in addition to the the intersection improvement the impact fee improvements, you know, we're we're asking for
support and just be able to move forward. Um but we're here to answer any questions.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Um I I have a question and maybe you all have a question, but uh the north-south vision road that you have to build, what
What
I what is that road? That's on your vision map. Um I think it was supposed to be a maybe a potential future connection to tower, but it right now it's a dead end street on the south because there's no access on that end.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
So can someone put up the vision road network in this area?
I'd be interested to see that. No one's ever showed it to me.
County Administrator
Yeah.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Okay. Does anyone else have any anyway? anyway?
Mike Moore
I mean I have some things, but I I think I want to hear public comment first before we
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Okay. We'll take public comment and I'm looking forward to seeing the vision road.
Jack Mariano
Maybe I could ask a couple questions that might help do maps as well. And I and I When I first looked at this I looked at it and I said this doesn't quite make sense. Why would Forcing the vision road construction on these guys to the other Property that's going above it. And then if I'm gonna spend two point seven million dollars, is that really the best use of the money. And if I was going to spend the two point seven million Would I really want to do that other improvement anyway? Um I think it's a good thing. It's tremendous that they want to put up their uh impact fee up front to go
pay what their portion would be. And I think it's going to be incumbent on us to take a look at our CIP. Uh To go fix that road one way or the other. And I think it's a pretty good network. You've got the development right above. We approved earlier that if you took those impact fee together you could have plenty of money to go build the road But I don't know if we ni really need to go through that. where that map shows that road going right now. Maybe a little bit to the south might save us a lot of money on the impact fee or on the um
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
You mean not go not hit the wetland?
Jack Mariano
Maybe maybe we can avoid the wetland. And I think we should go study that before we actually even make a decision. But if we g we know we're going to get their impact fee up front to go make that improvement, I think in a very short period of time we can make that decision whether we want to do the other improvement or just do the one shot and Do it once and be done.
Mike Moore
Well Madam Chairman Mariano. I was gonna wait on that, but Do we talk about, you know, uh, And I I had a conversation with um Terry Pitos before the this meeting for the record. Um and that was a discussion he had with me about possibly paying the impact fees up front and st and things. Um you know, as a as a county that's growing as as as fast as Pasco County is, and you'll see during my presentation later this afternoon during um miscellaneous business. um some issues we're having
with traffic in certain areas that I don't know if we'll ever be able to fix because of the amount of, for example, uh just being honest, amount of apartment complexes this one section, for example. Um
Um but when if you know to put a burden, additional burden on the county, for example, to put it within our CAP, where there's this road or another road. And then we have to go through this whole process. When will it even be built? And that's the question. You know, I look at maybe like for an example and staff can comment on this, I'll use maybe Union Park for example. If I'm not correct, there was vision roads that went through Union Park. Well they built that. Union Park built it that road, if I'm not correct, right? Well
it's built in the div while the development was going in. Okay. Let's forward an example. Okay. And there's other one there's other ones as well. Um to constantly put things
that's not a job creating site is not creating jobs and of benefit for the entire county, I I have issues with. That's me personally. You know, I I have issues with us putting something in our CIP that benefits only residential. It's not a job creating site. So to me Me personally, I I mean I d okay, great, pay the impact fee up front. Now it's on the county's back. When is it gonna happen? Well we have a list of projects and we always fight
over them during MPO in a cordial way. of whose project should rank first. Where is that even gonna sit on the list? Because we know, well now this is more important. Now this is more important. It could sit there ten or fifteen, twenty years. if it's put in the CIP. We see things that take it out of the CIP. When I came on the commission, for example, Old Pasco Road, was pulled off. We had to put it back on. Now we know how big a need that is now. But it should have been done 15 years ago, because you see what's happening now. There's
my question. Not my question. That's that's my issue again. Okay, pay it up front. We'll put put in our C I P, but I don't know when that's gonna be done. It could be fifteen years down the route.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
So so I also gosh, I've been talking to a lot of people about this um over and over again, had some thoughts because and if you listen to the Planning Commission Um You know, a hundred and eight uh a hundred and eight houses building two vision roads, that's unusual in the county. Um but also um you know it doesn't you could wait for the vision someone else to build the vision vision road, but let me Let me try and piece together an idea that
I had with David and Terry. Um And that is that we um well David had an idea about uh buying back. David, do you want to explain your ideas about the impact fee?
the l um Arden Preserve number? So those are the two questions I have. And David, you go first.
Unidentified speakerVoice E
We can't hear you, David. Yeah, what's going on with these? You gotta hold it down.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay, to Commissioner Moore's point. Can you hear me now? Yeah. This would still affect the CIP, but you could I think one of the applicants' concerns would be that they'd have, you know, two plus million dollars worth of credits that they couldn't use on their own site. So the concept I discussed with with Commissioner Starkey was that we give them a period of time to try to use their credits themselves or sell them privately. But if they couldn't sell them privately for after a period of time, that the county would then basically buy back any unused credits from them. But
it to Commissioner Morse point, would that potentially affect the CIP? Yes it could, because you'd be paying them cash for their credits. So that cash would have to come from somewhere I have I have asked Mr Carbolo if he knows what road projects would be affected by that payment. Um I don't know if he's got an answer yet or not, but We have other roads in that we have Ridge Road, we have Tower Road, we have Sun Lake Boulevard. Yeah. I don't know which of those this could affect.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
And I would I would say to Commissioner Mariano's point, do we really have to move that vision road up that high and go through the wetland or can it just move up north to uh just to below the wetland without adding those costs? And Um and then I wanna know the Arden number and then um I would say I wouldn't want Uh because time is money. Uh I would want them to be able to go ahead and start development while waiting while working
on that on the permit, whoever's going for it, to go through there. And um And so so that they don't have to wait the the two years to on their project. But Commissioner Mariano?
Jack Mariano
So I so I just want to make sure the Vision Road being built on the Clark property, were you talking about the impact fee from there that could be used to
Unidentified speakerVoice B
it? So There are a number of projects in this area that will be paying mobility fees. They won't be getting any credits. Hardin is one. The Clark MPUD is not really building anything that's credible. Right. Um there could be other projects in this area that are
Jack Mariano
Okay. So that was my point. So It's not a little bit more than a little bit. If if Clark doesn't come in and these guys don't come in and Arden wasn't there, You wouldn't you'd put the money in the C A P somewhere else, but to me When you've got the need that's in this area that's going right there and you've got developments that are coming right there, if you take that money and allocate it towards it, I think it's a the ultimate way to go. Rather than have it the burden of one developer or the other developer do it, if we just go take it and go look at it and we now have the money to go use it, we can go devise what we
think is best and just go do it with the money that's coming in from other people. So the development's paying its way through its impact fee and the impact that they're having, they're fixing. And this is just kind of a complex one where you got one guy that you want him to go build the vision road before he comes in, but it's not even on their property, and we've just approved the other one above it to say, well, there's no benefit he's getting 'cause he's going to the north, but we're gonna use his property which is dedicating to us. to go build that vision road. So we've got the framework involved to make it happen. That's just mechanically making it work. When to me the fairest
way is And I and I think these guys stepping up, paying their money up front. Well might even help us to build the whole road if we avoid the wetland.
Eva Spizak
Yeah.
Mike Moore
So so the question would be and you you talk about the other development there there is a whole David can speak on this. I'd rather him speak on it. You know, they're going out causeway and the causeway is being white. So it's that's not the impact. Um but again we we have put vision roads in and lots of they're for a reason. Right.
In as a county thinking towards the future, continue to think towards the future If we're always waiting And waiting. for quote development to come. We're gonna be behind the eight ball every time. So one of the things I heard at the Planning Commission, because I did watch the Planning Commission meeting, is like, well, why isn't this Why isn't this road going to be done before the development happens?
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
But we don't we don't have the money ahead.
Mike Moore
Well I understand, but um but uh we're as we look towards what's going on now in certain areas of the county that can't handle that can't handle the traffic. If we start don't start g doing these roads in advance, we're never gonna catch up. You'll
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
be a positive.
Rarely. I I'm gonna say never because we did it on State Road 56, because we borrowed money from the state to do that. And it worked out
Mike Moore
great. And it yeah, it's a good idea.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
And I see the administrator there shaking her head. I I mean It the the the improvements follow the money. They don't go The development action. They don't go in front of the development action. You just can't, because it's impact fee and mobility fees that we use to pay for the improvement.
Mike Moore
And I worked on very hard to make that happen and it And we looked at some of the master planning communities we have now. Where those roads are being built. Yeah. continually with that development going in. It's not a bad thing. It's a good thing. Anyways, I don't want to keep going. I I'd rather hear f I know we have to have public comment, so
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Is this the um Vision Road map? Okay, so what is that? Is that roadway? Something in red at the bottom. Is that the piece that they have to build going through?
Unidentified speakerVoice G
And where does that connect?
And where does that connect to? I mean it's really not a very good map actually. There we go. I I mean I I don't know the road n plan network in the network.
Christina Fitzpatrick
She's a
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
darky
Unidentified speakerVoice G
dual monitor. There you go.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
No, you went too far.
Christina Fitzpatrick
That way.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Commissioner Fitzpatrick.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Is there a way to have just a southern entrance into this community and why do they need to have a north and south vision road when it's cutting through the middle of one hundred and eight homes? I find it very dangerous and it's a safety concern for kids that live within that community.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So can I just address the North South Road real quick? So You do have to remember this project's gonna need to have an internal collector road anyway to open up the project for development. So I don't think probably the reason they're not complaining too much about the north south Vision road and it does look like it's supposed to eventually connect down the tower. I can't See the entire map there. Please keep in mind that they have to build a a collector road in their project anyway. So Yes, is it it's following the alignment of
the Vision Network, but I don't know that it's a really an additional burden like this the east-west vision road is that's off their site. If if you look at their map of their s their proposed subdivision, they they have they need they're incorporating the Vision Road into their subdivision network anyway.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
So that Drexel Road goes right along um houses on the lake there. And that's a vision what kind of vision road is that?
I don't know. I I'll I don't understand this road network.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Again, so why can we not connect from the south and go up? There's no access down there. That I I think that's a vacant
Would that be less expensive to build going south to Tower Road instead of cutting through Westeria and trying to do
What
No, I think it would be actually more and I
Christina Fitzpatrick
don't know that
What
the county would have the right-way. The reason they got the right-way is because of the Clark MPD that you just approved. But again, there's no PDE study that's been done, no route study. We have looked at trying to get around that wetland. We actually looked at that route. Um, that wetland goes almost right to the right-of-way line. It's it it where the existing alignment is right now, if you go back on one of our maps, you can see how it kind of curves down. That existing axis, like I said, is the axis that they've been utilizing these properties for years. And of course they've naturally,
you know, migrated around that wetland to not to not impact it. Um which is a huge issue. Um how many homes are down along Wisteria Loop? Um I'm not sure. I know, you know, there's some large lot homes, estate type residential homes along the lake as you come around that that that you know eastern curve. Um I know there's some large lots in there. Um and then you've got the Arden that's got 130, of course Clark that you just approved, that's got four ten, and then us,
the little guy on the block, which our max is like eight one oh eight. Um That's
Unidentified speakerVoice G
it. Mm-hmm.
Jack Mariano
I'd like to go to public comment. Just one quick thing. Shelley just mentioned something I think that makes a big difference. So pretty much the road that's existing right now, you're telling me it just abuts the wetland anyway.
What
Yes, it skirts around the you can see that little class one with the very tail of it. It's it and that's why they've done that, I'm assuming, over the years.
Jack Mariano
So we're gonna have to go through the wetland no matter what anyway. It's gonna be a two year project to go through the process.
What
You are gonna have to go through. We looked at potentially moving it south because we were trying to figure out a way around it and it ended up still being two point one. So I
Jack Mariano
think we've got to just go along the way that. We're gonna have to go through the wetland and it's gonna be a two-year process. Okay.
What
And we're not sure if DEP is gonna even permit it because my understanding there's some issues not only with there going on, but some other issues in regards to the fact that it's gonna connect to nothing. It's basically the rows between two thorns, the three million dollar rows between two thorns that um you know they don't they don't know if DEP is gonna support it, but I mean that would all come with a route study and those kinds of things.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
All right, let me let me uh take public comment. Do we have people signed up to
Unidentified speakerVoice E
do we do. Um first person is Chris Knocko.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Welcome again. Yeah, but
Sheriff
Dans like you just showed up. Uh Chris Knocko, [address removed]. I'm here as a private citizen. And I res in a Pasco County. So uh Mr.
Unidentified speakerVoice E
Nacko, I think you also have to say that you've been sworn to the M.
Sheriff
I've been sworn, yes, appreciate. Thank you. So uh thank you Chair. So a couple things. As I said, I'm here as a private resident. Um the Planning Commission, you know, after several discussions, several meetings, came up to have the vision route. And so I approve that. Uh I approve it for several reasons. And and Chair, it's funny, you you can always have things that you're ready to say, but as you speak there's things that I heard I'm like, I want to hit upon. So you said wait. Uh honestly, that's something that needs to be done. I I know you keep hearing it's a it's only 108 pro
housing project. There are people that live in that area that that hundred and eight will affect because that's not just a hundred and eight cars. People have numerous cars. So you're talking about flow, but let me go back to this. This goes back to the Angeline project. So most of these projects that are being built that they talk about, oh, we're right off a main road. You are off a main road. Whether it's Ballantray, Oakstead, they're right on main roads and they just come right off for Wilderness Lakes, you just come right off onto the main road. This is now going onto roads that does everybody remember that Calvary Road that was shown? Calvary
looks like a nice highway compared to Wisteria and Gardenia. What we're talking about. So, this is actually part of the Angeline project. There are only several places where the roads with the train tracks will be crossing over. This is one of them. When you see the way you came off and one of them it'll show it. Where the red goes, that was the vision road. What's often not talked about is that Blue Road, if they talk about just that we're gonna make improvements Well, those improvements mean that everybody from the Angeline, everybody from the Moffitt project is gonna be coming
down when they there's only gonna be several places they're gonna go. They're gonna be going, they can use that now, but they're not just gonna go to 41. They're gonna try to connect down the tower road. So You for it's often oh they're going to forty one. They're not. They're cutting to Tower Road. People who live in that area know where they're going in there. That's why I said this is a micro pro it's only this one little problem, but this is a macro issue that I agree to fact that we need to look at the Angeline project. We need to see how it connects and why wait? The value of the house, the land is gonna go up. We
all know that as things are going. If they would wait, they would make more profit. And you said time is money, time is money. Profit will be made at some point. Oh I'm hey you want to build houses? Let's build houses when the roads are in place. where people aren't infected. And I get it, oh they have to catch up. I know I gotta hurry up.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
No
Sheriff
no
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
people the
Sheriff
people,
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
the audience cannot be s making sounds. Thank you.
Sheriff
But my my concern is If we don't do it right The people that live there are gonna live in misery for a lot longer time than it is or would await it if we just sent it right to the I'm
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
gonna ask the the gallery once again, please don't make any sounds. Give give the applic give the speaker his respect. Thank you.
Sheriff
So and I appreciate it so that that's what I just go back to. If if we're gonna do it, let's have the vision run in place. I I'm not sure if it's the developer the applicant. How we're going to do it in the long run, but if we wait, maybe there's more applicants that are bigger projects that are coming. And when they can all do it together. But for people that are to live there, for people who live in that community, it's not just about going to 41. It's about going to Tower Road. And we all know Tower Road has a big vision. I've heard before people talk about making Tower Road this massive road. We're gonna have restaurants, we're gonna have Bike bike rides. You could ride your bike
up and down it. Don't think for once that when people come off that road, they're not gonna go to Tower Road if it's gonna be what people speak it's gonna be. So then I appreciate it. I just think the we need the vision road there. If we don't do the vision road, it's just gonna be a micro issue. It's gonna turn into a macro problem, and it's never gonna be fixed. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
The next applicant is Ray Gat.
Welcome again as well. Public speaker. Oh, I'm sorry, not applicant.
Raymond Gadd
Public speaker.
I am also not here in my official capacity. Um RayCAD [address removed]. Um I want to focus on the big picture as opposed to getting bogged down in all the details. Uh but before I do that, I want you to please think about something that Shelley Johnson said. She paints a picture of KB Holmes, this developer, as being like some poor little homeless puppy looking for a home. And if KB Holmes doesn't get this project, they're not gonna go bankrupt tomorrow. They're just gonna find another piece of property and go develop it.
Um KB Homes is a solid company and uh they have uh other opportunities. So I I wouldn't put them on your worry list. Let me focus on the big picture for a minute. If you leave here and you go out to Highway 52 and you hang a right turn and go down Highway 41. As you're going down on Highway 41, you'll see a new development. I can't remember the name of that one, but it was a Lester Dairy project. When you turn into that project, there's a parkway into that project. If you keep going,
you see Asbel Creek, you see Tierra del Sol. And they all have gigantic parkways that go into those properties. Those are on the right on the west side of the road. If you look on the left side of the road, you have Conerton, which has a gigantic parkway going it into it, which will be the uh future eastern extension of Ridge Road. Then if you go down again, there's a Publix that goes right there on the corner that goes into Conerton and they have a parkway going into Conerton there. And uh north of Tier D uh
south of Tierra del Sol, you have Lakeshore Ranch, and it's a gated community with a parkway that goes into that. And then you get to the D.R. Horton project, was isn't there yet, but D.R. Horton made a brilliant planning decision because they're gonna bring all of their homes out on to, I believe, Roach's Run and some.
Vastly improve that area. But as you move past D.R. Horton, then on the left you have the same thing. You have Wilderness Lakes, which is also a parkway into a big neighborhood. Now you go a little bit further south and you get into an old part of Pasco County, which was kind of part of the Bexley Ranch, Mr. Bexley's old homestead, and you have lakefront communities with Little Lake Thomas, uh, Gardenia,
uh Big Lake Thomas, and lots of little lakes in there with these spider web roads that are going around them. And so next comes another development. Okay, and unlike the developments I described to you, KB Holmes comes in and drop jumps across these lakes. And these homes that have two acre, three acre, four acre, I have six acres. on the lake and they're gonna build this road past our neighborhood And it's
interesting that that Shelley said when they were asked about that vision road, she said, Oh, I don't know where it was going. I I I think it was supposed to go out to Tower. Well, yeah, maybe it was supposed to go out to tower, and there was a reason that it was supposed to go out to tower, and it was because they were gonna take the traffic. And the trips generated from that neighborhood out to Tor Tower Road, which is going to be a major thoroughfare in this county, I think, someday. And so all that we're asking is we're not opposed to the
development. But between 52 and 54 you got limited opportunities to cross those railroad tracks. And right now we have a problem in this county going east and west. So we have 54, we got 52, and Ridge Road, fingers crossed, we'll pretty soon be at 41. But then you've got an opportunity to get around across the railroad tracks at Wisteria. an opportunity to get across a tower. And then of course you have Lake Patience who that goes across, which is not a very good
road. And then I think there's a crossing uh down by the new substation that went in at Lando Lakes. My issue from a big picture standpoint is all three of those roads will be crowded as heck if you had five minutes. If you don't take those intermediate roads into consideration, Mr. Oakley? Okay. Yes. So he shafted you before he handed you the gap. And so if you if you Have
a focus on those intermediate roads that cross those railroad tracks, then you're going to create opportunities for people to travel on those roads and potentially take some of the road off, some of the traffic off 52, 54, and Ridge Road by making those good, solid, thoroughfare roads that people can travel. And so I am encouraging you to consider somehow getting this vision
road built over to 41. And even then, it's not a godsend because I want to remember, I want you to remember that it's not just Angeline, it's South Bexley, it's North Bexley, it is everything west of the railroad tracks that's going to come over to 41. And on Westeria You're gonna have a right turn only on to forty one and then you're gonna jam up Tower Road. Thank you.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Thank you. Is there anyone else that wanted to speak?
Unidentified speakerVoice E
Yes, uh we have another person uh signed up, Jeremy Kelch.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Is there anyone after Jeremy?
Uh I see a hand back. Come on up, sit up closer and then you can go after good afternoon.
project engineer
Commissioner, thank you. I have five minutes also and I have Jeremy Couch, [address removed].
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
You're not getting my Christmas
project engineer
hand.
He didn't even
tell me about
that. This is a really cool little area of Land O' Lakes. Um I moved my business to this area. I've made my homestead. uh on this area. I've invested a lot of money on this street. Um This board would like to see more high end housing in this area. This is a street where you have that. Um I I understand the complex decision that the board has to make. Um but if you look at your vision road, it's the right vision. System.
Drexel, which is a main road, will come north through the renter property and hit But Bexley Road, which will be the vision road that goes east. and hits forty one. You also have South Westeria, which nobody's talked about. That's the way I go to work. um and go go to and from my property, um, which is also supposed to be a vision road. You have Lake Patience, which is a vision road. All of these roads will take the burden off of fifty-four and fifty-two.
If I I understand that it's a tough decision. But this builder is speculating. They have taken and they've went right in the middle of a little country road and they want to build a home. They're homes. their compatibility argument is well we're RISC III. We we have to cross my five eight my three acres. Um Mr. Knocos in the area, Mr. Gads six acres. The house on the corner is sixteen acres. The house right next door is five acres. You're crossing
all of these to get to 5,000 square foot lots. You're not on a collector. So the way you have to do it is make yourself on a collector, which is build the vision road. And I know that's a big expense. But that's part of being a developer is you spend the money. I'm in support. If they build the road. If they do a substandard improvement, there's not gonna be any sidewalk, there's not gonna be any trail, It's just gonna be a little widening down our street. and then we'll have some recession and then some future kick start Bexley
will come in and say, Well We're gonna get it started again, but we just need to use Wisteria and the Vision Road never gets built. And then you have these high end homes on the lake and we have to deal with it. You know what we're gonna do? We're gonna move to Keisto. Well they're gonna protect us. And so I I'm in support of the project and I know it's a hard decision. They just need to build the vision road and be done with it. you.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Thank you. Is there anyone else that wanted to speak to this? Oh yeah, one more. If If there's anyone else, please stand up behind this because I'm going to close public comment after him if no one stands up. Thank you.
Unidentified speakerVoice H
Uh Darrell Renner, [address removed]. Uh I have been sworn. Um and I happen to be the landowner. Um You know, I won't disagree with Mr. Gad's Oratory skills. He's very good at that. But every project that he described. with these major roadways into 'em are huge, huge, huge projects. You know, uh Chris described the macro and the micro issues of this project. But this
doesn't really even come to a micro issue. It's almost like a mini micro, just like your iPhones that have gotten so small to plug in. And I understand the need for the Vision Roads, which is one of the reasons that prompted me to even sell my property. The main vision road coming out of Bexley. um is a g is a major road that's gonna take a huge chunk of my property as they widen that and put it through there. the north south vision road that you saw on the map there. bisex my property right down the middle of that piece of property.
When I first saw this w and entered into the the relationship with K B, there was another road that came off of that north south road and dissected behind directly behind my home and went out into the Bexley Ranch. And and so I said, Well you know what, this isn't why I moved here. I respect the fact that people want pieces of property and I wanted a piece of property and I wanted to be able to you know, do some of the things with a larger piece of property that if all these vision roads come through, I won't be able to do now. I mean my
property will be d dissected and I won't have what I originally bought. So my encouragement to you is is to And again, as they've said, it's a tough job. But the planners originally planned that road to come out and and improve that road to come out onto Wisteria and somehow we've gotten sidetracked into a ton of different options as to how we can make that work. So um again I know you have a hard decision, but again the
reason for my decision is is because my fifty acres that I bought over twenty years ago is not gonna be in the future for me what I had intended it to be. So thank you.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Thank you.
Okay, so it's it's back to us. Um
Unidentified speakerVoice G
Rebutt.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
A rebuttal from the applicant. You want to say anything?
What
Yes, and listening to the comments, I just I want to reiterate, because I do think it's so important, that the existing alignment, we can bring it up to standard, which is what your code requires us to do. And that is what staff has said we can do. That was their original recommendation, that's what we said we can do, that's what all the other developments do. Um, you know, this movement of this vision road north to another. property is an is an offsite road improvement project for this particular development. We're not loading anything on that load. The
substand on that road, the the substandard road specifically says if you read your code, it specifically says it's to address. Subst to address impacts on substandard roads. as a result of new development. The substandard road involved is the existing alignment. This 108 units is going to bring that up to standard, which we are required to do. And we're gonna even do beyond that. We're gonna do the intersection improvement and we're also gonna put the the impact fee out there, prepay, so that when another development, not the county even comes along, Bexley,
there's gonna be amendments there's gonna be development pressure coming, there's gonna be other developments that are gonna trigger it. And there's gonna be money there for it. So a route study and stuff can be done because it's gonna be a big problem where it where it's been moved to. And I don't know if that was something that was considered when it was moved, but Um We can bring it up to standard. That's what the code requires us to do. We are trying our hardest to meet everybody halfway, which is why we said we'll do the intersection improvement and and that's additional. Not take impact fee credits and then on top of that the prepayment of the fees. But
for I understand they're saying this isn't the little guy, the developments that were described to you. Mm. you know, by Mr. Gadd, um our large developments. This is not a large development and it doesn't exist in a vacuum. I mean it is what it is. It's a small development and it's being it is being punished for it. It's being singled out and treated differently. There's I don't know how else you can what other way you can call it on this one. Right. Um Terry, did you get the
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
number from the Arden M P U D
Ron OakleyChair
We're working on it. Uh I'm almost there with the fiscal team.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Okay. Um so they had to improve wisteria from their western corner there to forty one, is that correct?
Ron OakleyChair
Yes.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Right. Did it get a trail or anything like that on it?
Ron OakleyChair
To m to my understanding there's not a chill, there's a sidewalk on it.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Okay. Um
Oh man, this is toughy. Madam Chairman M Yeah Well okay, let me let me say something.
Um as the sh share f as Mr. Nacko uh said, it it is the it is one of the entrances to Angeline, which is a really important development that's coming, Besley and and to Angeline to the county. Lots of jobs and um And I I'm in a I am a believer of a road network and
I've been looking here on the map and looking at that north-south road going through Renner. I and there's a some property that s surrounds Renner on the south and the west. It's owned by L S B Corporation, whoever that is, but I assume that that vision road will uh go through that property and be straightened out a little bit? It's unwinding around. Yeah.
Ron OakleyChair
Can I make a quick clarification regarding um the Vision Road Network itself? If if we could bring up the vision roadmap just to Just to be sure about the geographies that we're talking about here. The if we zoom out just a little bit, um A little bit more. That should be a good see if I can use the pointer here. So
Unidentified speakerVoice I
Click hold and rank.
Ron OakleyChair
Oh to the right. Okay, Okay, so Where are we at here? This is the general location of where we're talking about today. When we when we hear the the project name Angeline, that project is all the way Further north.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
It's north of Ridge Road?
Ron OakleyChair
Here.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
No.
Ron OakleyChair
Yes. The Angela Project is north of Ridge
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Road. Okay. The Moffitt is The Moffitt project is south of Ridge Road.
Oh I thought it was south of
Mike Moore
Actually is the res the residential area that's gonna be more than
Christina Fitzpatrick
And then they'll also have Sun Lake.
Ron OakleyChair
There we are. I just missed it.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Then also Sun Lake will connect from north to south, correct?
Ron OakleyChair
This red line that you see here, this is the Sun Lake from the
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Okay, so that's an important northwest, north-south road. Right. And so then our east-west roads.
Ron OakleyChair
And here's the here's the subject area that we're talking about. And this line here that's coming down is the Bexley Mysteria Loop collector road network that that's been discussed. So really the there's a the Bexley North area.
Unidentified speakerVoice G
Okay.
Ron OakleyChair
There you might have some project Or some traffic that will go to forty one, but I believe most of the Bexley North traffic has been already captured and being sent southward.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Yeah.
Ron OakleyChair
So just to clarify on the geographies on how that traffic that is on the west side of the train tracks will be affecting and traveling toward US forty one.
Mike Moore
Madam Chair, since Terry's here. Yeah, go ahead. Terry, look so sh show ever let's go to the vision road in question.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
With your little pointer?
Mike Moore
Yeah. Get on get in there pretty good. Nice and tight.
Ron OakleyChair
Uh go put it north and east. So it's not north and out there.
Unidentified speakerVoice G
A little bit more parallel to the trays between it and you're keeping that access route.
Well like though your pointer on it. Like surround the area.
Oh yeah.
Ron OakleyChair
Oh where's he talking about right here? Okay, there it is. Yeah. What's that?
Mike Moore
So what you and I spoke about earlier and what you you mentioned as well, Madonna is that your proposal or their proposal, I don't know whose proposal was. Okay. The the uh the the uh applicant's proposal was to pay once again their um impact fee Up front.
Ron OakleyChair
Yes, that's what the applicant was proposing.
Mike Moore
Right. And w what's that amount guesstimated?
Ron OakleyChair
About a million nine hundred dollars.
Uh I think some of the projections that I saw were just about three million or a little bit more than three million.
Mike Moore
Okay. So three million. So again I'll just go back to the statement I made earlier, again We c Great. We collect money up front. But where's the other two million going to come from? Again, we put something in the C I P We're gonna have to collect for it. Where's the rest of the funding gonna come from? So that's why it's in it'll set and we know it'll sit.
Yeah.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Has anything come in on this L S I won't say L S D L S B corporation yet? Have we seen any activity on the parcel to the left? And would they have responsibility to help? Put in that vision road.
Ron OakleyChair
Yeah.
We haven't seen anything on the
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
I'm sorry you can't I'd like to know what you're saying, but you can't do that.
Ron OakleyChair
So we haven't quite seen anything on the neighboring properties.
Mike Carballa
No, I I wanted to go back to Commissioner Moore's statement. I mean, you know, the current priorities in that central area are are Ridge Road extension, Moffat work, and some of the Sun Lake stuff. I mean we wouldn't be able to even entertain the additional two to three million until post-2025 to even look at it. Right.
Right.
Mike Moore
So there lies a concern like it does in other developments and We don't know when the road's gonna be done.
No somebody if I you know I I know that you don't want to build it, but
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
So how much how much uh was left in the Arden development?
Ron OakleyChair
The the th our fiscal team is looking at that right now. Um it's a pretty big file that they're trying to dig into right now. So uh it's taking a little bit of time for them to bring up all the data and information.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
So what I'm looking for is Arden um you know develop generated so much in um impact fees and then they paid for their portion of the road. um improvement. So I'm looking for the Delta that was done on that road.
And seeing if it can be added to the cost of this road.
County Administrator
Just keep in mind that Through construction of Ridge Road Phase Two, all mobility fees in the central zone effectively are going to Ridge Road Phase Two. That's how we're paying for Ridge Road Phase Two.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
And so um if we get the fifteen million? What from the legislature? Fourteen. Fourteen.
County Administrator
Mm. That that would help, but we won't know about that for several months.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Uh-huh. Well, till June or July, right? June? I don't know when his signs the budget. We gotta wait till he signs the budget.
Mike Moore
Correct.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Commissioner Starkey. Commissioner Fitzpatrick. Thank you. Okay, so while I'm sitting here looking along with stereo loop and where the I don't remember the name of the neighborhood. Aden Aiden? up north.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Arden
Christina Fitzpatrick
Arden Arden. What if if you're going down with Serial Loop and you go al and have uh the road split where Wisteria is and go along the wetlands, around the wetlands, and then connect Wisteria Loop to the other side. And then you can put trees in between that and Wisteria Loop and keep the property's separate and the higher end homes can still have their privacy.
And it won't affect all the traffic won't affect them.
and they're still on the same person's property, you're just moving instead of going over wetlands, you're going around, but then you're putting trees in between the keep the separation and division.
And I don't know how to show it to everybody, so if you want to pull up the map, I just I'm on Pasco PA.
Or can you pull up with Syria?
County Administrator
Well the vision road is on there with the wetland Right.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Okay, so right here. Is there a pointer or something I can
So yes, if you just split right at that north end around and follow the wetlands all the way around and then connect at the south end and then you can put trees right on the north. Like in that sort of thing. East, right through there. And then still they still have their privacy. And you don't have to go over the wetlands, you're still going around, but it's still giving that buffer.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Yeah.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Then everyone will be happy.
Ron OakleyChair
I would I mean I I don't know if I am prepared to talk about the alignment of a vision road at this stage um to say whether that is an appropriate alignment or not.
Christina Fitzpatrick
If it's gonna cost two point one million and then you have to go through and have wetland mitigations instead of just going right around along the edge of the wetlands.
You can even throw a
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
wall
Christina Fitzpatrick
in there if you want, I guess. Yes.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
I agree. Let's move the whole road north onto that property.
Mike Moore
Not bad ideas, right?
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Thank you.
Mike Moore
We're not going to obviously be able to figure that out right now between the staff and developers. So I'll make a motion to continue and bring this back and after you look at that.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yes. The condition does not set an alignment, to be clear. What it says is that they'd have to build the vision road. Through the Clark MPUD and all of the land you're talking about appears to be within the Clark MPUD. So
Unidentified speakerVoice G
correct.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
The alignment, as Mr. Pito said, would be established later. So if they there's a way to build it The way Commissioner Fitzpatrick stated That's still allowed by the existing condition.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
The question is who who has to pay for the whole thing? And so that's why I'm trying to find a little help from So the Arden. And
Mike Moore
Well Arden's not gonna pay they're already.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
No, no, they I'm just saying just take the leftover that's
Unidentified speakerVoice B
from there and say to that, Commissioner Starkey, just keep in mind that when Arden paid their mobility fees, it probably went into the general pot for this zone. Which goes to roads like Ridge Road, Sunlight Boulevard, Moffitt Spine Road.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
How much are we talking?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
I don't know. I'm just letting you know that any time you take money out of the CIP it affects
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
I know that.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
And I know you push for Tower Road to get built, and that's potentially another road that's affected by
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
I just I just don't see how you put a three million dollar road on a hundred and eight unit development. Can we have the
Christina Fitzpatrick
applicant come back up? Please.
I know you were mentioning cost constraints and Budget. Now if we're not going directly over wetlands, you won't have to do wetland mitigation. So would it be more effici cost efficient and do you know about an estimate of how much the cost would be to go around?
What
We do. Um because we did look at that um to move it south. The cost estimate we were looking at was about two point one million. the existing alignment to improve it, improve the intersection is 1.3 million. So we're s we still have a gap, because we're still at 2.1 million. Um and cost.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Compared to one point two.
What
Um compared to 1.3, right, which is what we actually can bring the existing alignment up to standard in accordance with county codes and traffic regs. As well as that intersection improvement. That full improvement is one point three.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So eight hundred
Christina Fitzpatrick
thousand.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
That difference is creditable though. So the difference between the one point three and the two point one would be credible, so they should be able to absorb you know, seven hundred thousand dollars worth of credits within their own project.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Yes. And we we have said that if for some reason you don't sell them back within five years, we'll buy those credits. I mean that's something we could.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
It's only a seven hundred thousand dollar gap. They can use all that in their own project. The the applicant said they can they have about nine hundred thousand dollars worth of fees.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Do you guys want to get this done today?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Well
What
I'm
not sure.
I call Mike or or Mike wanna uh my understanding is, and I could be wrong, um, is that and I cause I think that's a you know an idea. that we can't get around that wetland on that south end. My understanding is that thing goes all the way to the right-of-way and we're gonna be impacting it no matter what.
Christina Fitzpatrick
So then it's not a good thing.
What
Unless we go with the existing alignment which f goes completely south of it, in my own.
Mike Moore
Exactly.
Um it's not gonna happen today. I have I'll make one or I'll make two motions. You guys choose. I'll make a motion to deny. Right now, or I can make a motion to continue if you guys want to try to work through this.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
I w I want to I would like to continue it. Motion
Christina Fitzpatrick
to continue.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Second.
Mike Moore
I'll make a motion to continue to see if you can Somehow figure this vision road out.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Yeah. And I'll second that.
Unidentified speakerVoice F
So are you continuing it to a date certain or
Mike Moore
we'll leave it up to the staff and applicant to see when they think they can bring this back.
Unidentified speakerVoice F
Okay.
You think you can bring it back for the January twenty fifth meeting?
What
Yeah, I think we definitely can.
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Okay. All
right.
What
All in favor?
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
Aye. Aye. Okay. That was a punt. Yeah.
Mike Moore
It was we
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
weren't gonna get that done here today.
All right. No more punning.
It's hard to
Ron OakleyChair
take care
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
of. Okay. What are are we on? Fund with the right-of-way. Okay, now another fun one. 125, right? Yes. Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice E
At some
Unidentified speakerVoice F
point you're probably gonna
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chair
do
it.
4Jan 25, 2022
Board of County CommissionersP68Public hearingApproved
Zoning Amendment (Regular) – … Mile West of the ~~intersection~~ Intersection of U.S. Highway 41 and Wisteria Loop
Approved minutes
Approved Staff’s recommendation with amended wording to include the alignment with Commissioner Moore and Commissioner Fitzpatrick voting nay.
Open this item →
35m
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um N right one. Madam Chairman Members of the Board of County Com previously uh for this item as it has been continued Uh from the dis October twenty sixth. twenty twenty one meeting and December seventh, twenty twenty one meeting to this time.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Thank you, Madam Chair, Commission Members. Jessica Coell with Planning and Development. Item P68 is item PDD 227526 in the name of Daryl and Karen Renner for the requested change in zoning from AC Agricultural District and AR1 Agricultural Residential District to an MPUD Master Plan Unit Development District to allow for 108 single-family detached units on. approximately 50.15 acres. As this item has been heard before by this commission, I will jump
forward to the changes that have occurred since the December 7th hearing.
Since December 7th, staff and the applicant have been in discussions about the proposed exhibits. Staff proposes revisions to add exhibit B to condition 16 and some text changes to conditions 16, 17, and 18. I would like to ask to receive and file these conditions as changed and provide copies for the commission members.
Anne Marie Williams
Second.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
All in favor? Aye.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Opposed? None?
Thank you.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So as you can see as the exhib or the changes provided, staff has agreed. To allow the applicant to enter into a development agreement within 60 days of the approval of this MPUD to address mobility fee credits, right-of-way dedication requirements, permitting and timing of construction of the substandard road improvements identified in condition 16. The other request the changes also identify adding
language to condition number 17. I'm sorry, to condition number eighteen that would allow for sixty-six units to receive certificate of occupancy before the completion of the roadway improvements. When the application was submitted, Land Development Code Section 901.4C, Substandard Roadway Analysis and Mitigation exemptions, allowed for an exemption in substandard roadway analysis and mitigation if the project generated less than 100 daily
trips. In December, the Board approved an amendment to this section of the Land Development Code that increased that threshold to less than 500 daily trips. Yes. With this code change, staff can support the 66 units prior to roadway improvements being completed. Thus, this proposed request, as conditioned with the revisions given to you today, is consistent with the Pasco County Land Development Code. and the applicable provisions within the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan. Again, here is a master
plan unit development master plat map plan for the M PUD. And this does come to you with the recommendation from staff and planning commission for approval as conditioned in your packet with those revised conditions 16 through 18 presented today. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um
Kathryn StarkeyChair
We do have one speaker signed up.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Well I think we have the applicant.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
So
What
Thank you, Shelley Johnson, [address removed], and I have been sworn we are in agreement with the revised conditions that have been handed out to y'all. Um we appreciate all the work because we've done this pretty quickly in 30 days. So and I know everybody's really busy, so um we're in we're good, but we're here to answer any questions if y'all have any. So
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Uh well I have one. Um did we change change our language? I was Oh we we're good? Okay. Yeah, we're good. Sounds like we're good. All right, um let's go to the Applicant who the speaker who signed up. Public comment. Public comment.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Looks like Ray is walking
Kathryn StarkeyChair
this way.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Ray Gab.
Would you acknowledge that you were previously sworn? I was
Raymond Gadd
uh previously sworn Ray Gad [address removed]. As always, I'm here in a person c personal capacity, not my professional capacity. Thank you for your time. Um as I had indicated earlier when we started this adventure, uh not opposed to development. And I'm not going to oppose, I think, staff recommendations today. I have a couple of questions though. Um one is regarding the 66 um COs.
Um I would like to think that after they got to 66 COs that no more permits. would um be issued um because a permit is permission. So I'm wondering what happens after the sixty six COs. Um because then if they issue permits that Is a little bit confusing to me. Um second thing, um, there is an actual alignment on the Vision Road map. And I would
like that alignment to be followed. So two items. What happens after the sixty-six COs, because if you issue them permits, that's a problem. And then number two, do we have some reasonable expectation that the actual existing vision road alignment that's on the vision map today will be followed?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay, we'll have staff um maybe answer those questions. Thank you.
Who is the s well, does anyone else want to speak? Why don't we get all the speakers and then we'll answer the questions.
Is someone coming to speak?
project engineer
Commissioner, my name's Jeremy Couch, [address removed]. I have not been sworn.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes. Do you swear that or affirm that the testimony you were about to give in this matter is the truth, so help you God? I do. Thank you. Um so I'll
project engineer
I'm a concerned um property owner on the street as well. Um I'm not opposed to development. But I would like them to follow the vision road alignment that's shown in the Clark M PUD, which Westeria loop is unique. There's a lot of homes that are estate homes on the lake. Um there's a lot of really nice mature trees. along the road is very quaint. Um the alignment goes right through a pasture. It's
gonna be easy for them to build. They're not gonna have conflicts with citizens. It's it's gonna be real smooth if they go through that pasture. And that will kinda keep the character of wisterio Um Intact. And so I support it as long as they follow that alignment. Thank you.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay, thank you.
Uh
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I don't believe we have one other speaker.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Is there anyone else after uh Mr. Nacko that would like to speak? All right, this will be our last speaker. Morning. Good afternoon. No, good afternoon.
Sheriff
It's a morning somewhere in the world. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Chris Notco, [address removed]. I've been sworn in and I am here as a private citizen. Um just to follow up with some of the things, you know. So anybody here in Pasco County knows that Ridge Road was the longest project ever to have to get approved. Our fear is the same thing here. We do not want a project where it's being promised that a vision road will be put in, but permits are delayed, things happen, and we understand from a corporate standpoint they just want to move forward to the next project. So I just asked a couple of
things. One is and I don't know what the answer what Mr. Gad had received, but After those 66 houses, the COs have to put in, but no more permits after that until the road is built. Because the road will never be built. if you allow all the houses to go up and then there'll be a reason that oh it's good you know the permits weren't in for the road. That's the fear for those people that live in that community. You know the other aspect is With those houses there, you know, the impact of the entire community. So I go, I'm all
for smart smart growth. I think everybody is. The fact that growth is coming, but make sure that road stays the way it was promised and it was aligned. It doesn't get realigned because of permitting. And the houses, there has to be something that the builder, there's an enticement that they have to stay engaged, have to be part of this project, and not come back to you two years from now and said, We did everything we could to improve this. road but we're not getting the permit so we're gonna just fix the road that's there now because if you you can't fix the road that's there now with the amount of growth because as I spoke about before it's not just about
this project that this community is concerned about. It's about all the further projects that are going on. So if we're talking about smart growth, we have to realize this is only one of the only roads that will cross over the path of train tracks. CSS CSX is not easy to get roads through over their lines. So we better be smart and do it right this time because if we're not, this is going to be a disaster for this Land Lakes area for numerous years to come. Thank you very much.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay, is there anyone online that wanted to speak to this issue? This item?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Just confirming with uh staff but I do not believe we have anyone, correct? To speak to this issue, John? We we have somebody from staff that can answer questions. No no he means aligned.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Nobody's aligned.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Waiting to speak uh No, I'm not sure. Well we're gonna have staff come up and let them answer those questions. Is that okay? All right, so who from staff will answer about the road alignment, please? And the vision road and how that alignment happens and
Denise
So Essen Khalil should be on. Um if you would unmute him, he can provide the answers.
Asin Khalil
Good afternoon, Commissioner This is Asin Khalil with current planning. Uh um. We answer Mr. Gad's first question about the 66 units. We are approving this project to go up to 66 certificates of occupancy. Uh and we are conditioning them that those improvements have to be completed. after the further development.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
After the 66.
Asin Khalil
Correct. Sorry. Before you issue the sixty-seventh or any more COs, you have to get those improvements completed. Okay. The applicant is also, I just wanna let the board know, the applicant is providing for bonding of all these improvements. Uh for the vision alignment. And there is a time period also. I believe uh staff um can clarify that Jessica can what's a twenty-four month period that we requested that these improvements be completed,
uh considering the vision alignment. On on the other question that Mr. Gadd brought up and Mr. Calf brought up. The alignment to stay as the whatever is shown on the vision map. Uh I just wanna clarify one thing. The alignment shown on the vision map is not really studied. It's not the ultimate alignment that may happen Uh When we do these types of roadways and alignments, there are studies done. And
since this alignment is showing cutting through a a major wetland We would attempt to avoid the wetland as much as possible, or at least the impact should be minimized. There is a drawing uh provided by the applicant and Jessica can share that on the big screen. That shows how the future alignment would happen. If Jessica could bring that up, please.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Well she's um getting that ready. I see the applicant for the Clark property is here. I mean the attorney representing the Clark property. Part of what needs to happen to make this road happen is that that land Uh needs to be dedicated to the county, is that correct? So that's gonna happen quickly.
Asin Khalil
The the Clark M PUD, this is S and Khalil again, Clark M PUD shows an area of dedication, uh right of way dedication for this future vision road. Uh based on the final alignment the design when it's done Uh I believe Clark is uh willing and ready to dedicate that right-of-way to us at at our request.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Jessica Coel again with Planning and Development. The alignment shown on the Clark MPUD is slightly different than what is shown here with the proposal that is Renner is is proposing. As uh my colleague Mr. Khalil said, the alignment is not studied. That would seek to avoid wetland impacts as much as possible through the various permitting agencies. Again, the Clark MPUD did agree to dedicate right-of-way and necessary stormwater area for
the improvements necessary for that right-of-way. There is some timing in the Clark MPUD that states that they have to do it at time of plat or within 90 days of the county's request. But Mr. Khalil is correct. The county was working and agreeing to a 25-year-old. four month period that would be discussed in the development agreement that would be later presented and seeking approval. Okay.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Madam Clerk.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Um question. Yeah, don't you? So don't leave. You s some you mentioned there was a bond that was gonna be issued. When does that bond get issued to build the road?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Bonding for subdivisions usually occurs when it is submitted for plating with our survey department if any outstanding improvements are not completed. It is bonded.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Do they apply to build the road or to get the road permitted immediately or do they wait?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
You mean the specific project the
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Vision Road. Are they applying to get it approved? Right away or are they waiting?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
The applicant, it's my understanding I'd rather them speak to it, but they have no intentions upon delaying the process any further for development of this site. They would seek to get the improvements um approved through the various agencies as expeditiously as possible and also enter into the development agreement to protect what the county wants as far as that roadway is concerned.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
uh the minimization of wetland impact because it's just something that's gonna happen through the process anyway. So we can follow the road as close as we want, but if the agencies say you've got to avoid it if you can We're gonna be subject to that.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
There are external agencies that could say that during the review process that We would want to at least
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Okay.
The issuing of COs and you can't issue it after sixty six, I'm comfortable with that language? If you go to the fact that they can't do anything after that with any permitting, you're gonna slow down the development, which is also the cash that's gonna bring in to help them pay for the thing. So I don't want to necessarily tie their permits up. But I'm okay with the COs.
on it. The permitting is just gonna slow down development and the financial viability of getting it all through together, which we want to see happen.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
And that is a an important clarifying point. So thank you for bringing that up. The permit issuance would be different than the issuance of the certificates of occupancy that would add vehicular trips to the roadway network.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay. Um Commissioner Fitzpatrick.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Okay, yes. I had made recommendations at the last meeting about the alignment of the road, but the alignment of the road on here looks exactly the same as it did last time.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Correct. And again, this is mostly conceptual because we do not know what the actual permitting agencies will require in order to avoid those wetland impacts when it is reviewed by those agencies. We do try to, when the county does these, do a PD and E study to try and avoid as many impacts, not just to wetlands, but adjacent areas that we might need to acquire right away from with private entities or private owners. So it is something that Is ideally trying to skirt the wetland because they assume that that will be one
of the comments that is generated through the review of this vision road. However, we can't determine until the construction plans are actually in for review the exact alignment necessary for this road.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
But it is the intent of the vision road to go as close to go as northward as possible without impacting that Class A wetland.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
I can't speak to that. I'm pretty sure that's what the intent is. I believe I believe that that would be determined by the agencies reviewing that. But
Christina Fitzpatrick
I did speak with the applicant and they said they were working with staff. So when they were saying that, I was under the impression that they were actually changing the alignment of the road and section C is still completely on Wisteria, and I thought they were gonna go around and change.
Yeah.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So I'm not sure if um the applicant's transportation engineer would like to speak to that. I know there were some safety concerns about the curvature of the road and doing it too drastically to not Like to prevent safety issues from occurring um with the realignment. Um however I do feel that staff has reviewed as much as we can conceptually without locking them into something that another agency might say that is not feasible when it comes to the actual permitting and construction of the roadway.
Christina Fitzpatrick
With the alignment not being updated at all, I am a little concerned because it still has it going over the wetlands and I always do try to find resolutions to the concerns on every s project and I would like to request a continuance on this project for thirty days.
Because this is not what I was discussed with the applicant.
County Administrator
Uh I mean it's not exactly the Vision Road, but it's pretty reasonably in compliance with the Vision Road alignment as is.
Christina Fitzpatrick
This looks exactly the same as the last time it was brought to us last month.
County Administrator
Correct. I think they made some adjustments. I will say that What you're talking about, Commissioner, are design details once we get surveying wetland field data and all the other design details that the engineering team will need to make final alignment decisions before prior to submitting for permits. So I mean you're talking about engineering design. in the actual alignment of the road. The vision is With every one of our patient roads, the where they go flexes based on what we find when we do the P D and E study. ourselves or whether or when a developer does it. So Yeah,
at the conceptual level this is what it is. As they go get and do their design work, which they have not done yet. they will dial in specifically where that road needs to be. in compliance with the vision as best they can and the other regulatory agencies.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Then it will be adjusted to move n as north as possible?
Jack MarianoVice Chair
We can't go too far north because
County Administrator
the curvature of the road, the design speed of the road, the impact of the existing network, all that has to go into the That's why we have a civil engineering design team that's going to be that's gonna work on that for the applicant to c solve those problems.
Christina Fitzpatrick
To me this looks the same and I'm not comfortable with that.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
No, it's it's it's different than the last one.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Well just uh
So The current alignment. If you're saying it's different, show the current alignment and show the alignment that we showed in the last meeting. Let's compare them.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
When you say current alignment, do you mean the vision road as in Pasco mapper as
Jack MarianoVice Chair
it's shown to you? I'm just going by what the commissioner just made a statement that it's not that it's
Christina Fitzpatrick
Section C looks exactly the same as what it was before.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
But you're saying it's different, so show us the difference.
Christina Fitzpatrick
Yes. Thank
Unidentified speakerVoice A
you. The I saw I'm sorry if I misled you. The the exhibit is the same as what you saw. The anal the the information presented during the back and forth with the applicant, we can't Hold them into a specific alignment without with what Mr. Biles identified as the details of engineering. So just to clarify, sections A and C are the substandard roadway improvements, and those are considered to be the areas of the road that are existing that just
need substandard roadway improvements. Section B is actually identified as the realignment portion. So I I Not certain if it's feasible for them to adjust section C as far as an alignment is concerned, especially trying to maintain the safety of the curvature of segment B.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Didn't you show us a map before that had section B going into that wetland? Did or somewhere I saw a section B going through the wetland?
Christina Fitzpatrick
It is going through the wetlands
Kathryn StarkeyChair
right now. No, no. I mean the wet the middle part of that wetland. There was another B that was shown to me somewhere along the line.
That would have required a bridge.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Yeah, where's the pastor that's a good thing?
Testimony a second ago. Can somebody show us the pasture?
These wearing road ties.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
We'll pull that up for you on Pasco Mapper.
Anne Marie Williams
Yeah.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Hey Madam Chair.
Michael Dadey
Yeah.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
A question for you.
We don't seem to be ready for prime time right now. Should we go to sixty nine and then bring this back until they're ready to
Kathryn StarkeyChair
How long until
Unidentified speakerVoice A
you're ready for what we need. She's pulling up the exhibit from Pasco Mapper right now that shows the conceptual alignment that was perceived to be appropriate before a P D and E study is actually done.
So if you can go like a little further west and zoom in. You're right there.
Zoom in a little bit please.
Asin Khalil
Mm-hmm.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
A little further east.
So you can see Bexley Road that comes over the train tracks there.
And if you zoom in on the wetlands, it does go a little bit further north than the existing proposed alignment in segment B. But the curvature of the road. Is a little bit more fluid with the exhibit shown.
I think you're on the wrong side of the track.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I don't know. Sho show the vision, right?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Right. Is that the train tracks to the right there? Yes. Okay.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Oh my god. I feel like I'm on a roller coaster ride looking at this.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So you can you can see to the west of the lake you have the wetlands, right w westeria loop.
Kind of ends and then the vision road is black and it comes through the bottom of the wetlands.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Follow it with your you might need to go to the Control the
Kathryn StarkeyChair
black dotted line is the vision road? Okay. Yes. So it's exactly the same. It's a little closer t to the wetland and that line. There you go. The big the big wetland. Yeah.
Skip Geiger
There we go.
Christina Fitzpatrick
So section B would actually start further north on Wisteria.
Third. Yes.
Ron Oakley
Oh and that's the pasture.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
So this is the section we're worried about right here.
Ron Oakley
Mm.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
W um when the align ho so when this alignment is d actually studied, does it come back to us or Well How does that work?
County Administrator
Do do you want us to bring the engineering design to you? I mean uh normally it doesn't. It goes into current planning and and is part of the review process.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I think it is the wish of this board to have that road go as far north as we can within reasonable costs that have been determined Right? The cost shares are out there. So
Christina Fitzpatrick
Madam
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Chair,
Christina Fitzpatrick
I would feel more comfortable voting if I knew the vote.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So we can have the development agreement set in more specific alignment because I assume we might then be able to go on through a little more deny.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
That makes sense. Right now it's just everyone's just guessing.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So we can make sure the development agreement has a more specific one.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yeah. All right, that worked for everybody?
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Well Madam Chairman Mariano.
Christina Fitzpatrick
I would be
Kathryn StarkeyChair
more
Christina Fitzpatrick
comfortable voting on this if I
Kathryn StarkeyChair
no one has seconded it.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Well I just questioned Madam Chairman M to h to Mr. Goldstein's statement, um bringing back the development agreement Um and you're talking about that which would include the road alignment. So if for some reason this board says they don't like the alignment What would that actually end up doing, you know, a positive or negative impact on the project?
I'm sorry, what?
Well what I'm asking. So that's that's my point. So now you have a a situation where you've got you okay, you have two sides of the corner of this one. So you have one side where they're concerns obviously of the of the citizens of the neighborhood, and then you have an applicant that's they're being told they can build sixty six homes. If you're not going to be able to do We don't like the alignment.
What happens then?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Well you could direct you could direct a different alignment. Uh I mean,
Jack MarianoVice Chair
But what okay, we can direct a different alignment, but what if that alignment isn't approved by the by the uh the um Who would who would I mean is Army Corps involved in this? Since it's a wetland? Or is it just Swift Mutt?
I mean yeah that's that's a question we can't answer right now.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
So I th I think that's a good suggestion that David has brought up.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Well I understand the suggestion, but at at the same time We still don't know
Kathryn StarkeyChair
We know we won't until they get it until someone does goes into it and they can't go into it if they don't have the agreement. So there's that's the only way to start studying where the alignment is. That's the process. Madam
Christina Fitzpatrick
Clerk.
I mean they'll never move forward. With this being in my district, I would like
So I can meet with the applicant and the citizens directly to address their concerns.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
No, no, I d no. I'm I'm not I mean
Christina Fitzpatrick
I'd like to make a motion for a continuance.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I'll I'll second it. If you're having some issues still. I mean that's
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Uh all
right,
we're gonna let the applicant come up and address
Michael Dadey
it. Michael Dadey, KB Holmes, I have been sworn. Um, we're out of contract time. We've been continued a number of times. We've it's been two years of process. I I I respectfully ask for an up and down vote. Commissioner Fitzpatrick, we will work hard with staff to make the alignment the best possible alignment. But you have a 404 web. You move it too far north, we're gonna have the Sierra Club after us. It's a balancing act that we'll work with staff, we'll work with the environmental consultants, we'll work with you. I'll
meet and show you but I can't afford another continuance Um Time, money, expense. We've been back before the board a couple times, planning and zoning two or three times. Um the vision road is off our property. It's on the Clark MPD. We're spending one point six million additional dollars to build this vision road for the community at large. So we respectfully ask that you move us forward. We'll use best engineering practices for the best alignment. Thank you.
Christina Fitzpatrick
I would request a continuance of February eighth.
Which
Kathryn StarkeyChair
is two weeks. But at least that gives us can't do that. It's wrong wrong side of the county.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
No, no. It's a central.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I I am not in support of continuing I'm s because I think that we have the opportunity to again look at it in even better detail. uh when the development agreement comes back. So we they'll ne we'll never have the detail you want if they if we don't let them move forward. Commissioner Mariano.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
You know, I I think they Kate B. Holmes has been great coming forward to actually work with us to actually build this road that's not even on the network. They're coming forward. Yeah, only sixty six units is a trigger for them to kind of make sure this happens. But trying to get in the middle of the easy. envir uh between the environmental permitting part of this whole thing. Is it's nothing we can control. Swift Mud or E D E P Army Corps says look you can't build it here, you gotta build it there. What are we gonna do? Not build the road? We need to build the road anyway. And
I think we've got the intentions where we can look closely on what's the best way. I trust our staff to come back with something to us. We can look at it, but If the agencies aren't gonna permit it the way it's set right there, and it is just a vision road map, so it's close to what's gonna be be happening, we hope, but if they push it down, they're gonna push it down. We can then still work with the land that we're gonna need on the keeping as far away as once we hit down the bottom of that corner to keep it inside the pasture as much as we can before it bends back over, but we can't control that. But for to hold this thing up, I mean, I think they bend it over backwards for
us. to m to make this vision road happen, which we do need in that area. And there's no other way to get the road done. It hasn't done been done for the previous MPDs. This is our last shot.
Christina Fitzpatrick
I don't think we should be building a vision road over wetlands at all.
Michael Dadey
Deck we've been dealt with, we didn't want to build the vision road at all. Yeah, don't go there. But we'll do our best to be environmentally sensitive. We're gonna move it as far north as we can for the neighborhood, as far south as the environmental agencies make us. Ultimately, I wish we had a P D and E study at the beginning of this process.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Thank
Michael Dadey
you.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I'm gonna move approval staff recommendation.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Well we're we we have a Motion and a second. So we can either have the second or move a second. Listen,
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I understand and I appreciate we can't have applicant during com our debate right now.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yeah, we're in debate.
And I don't know if we have a parliamentarian, but
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I think we need to clear the grounds for a second 'cause we're in we're in the middle of Commissioner Oakley that's
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Did you have something to add that was relevant? Can I just ask a clarifying question from the commission members? Um when you know Commissioner Mariano brought up not withholding building permits, I just want to make sure we're clear in the conditions. Um are you suggesting that we do not uphold building permits after the sixty-sixth or we do not uphold COs after the sixty-sixth? I think it's COs.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I don't think that's the same thing.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Thank you.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um but so the idea is to control the amount of people driving on the road. So without a CO there won't be anyone living in those houses to drive on the road. Um
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Yeah listen, I understand you guys wanna get going. I appreciate it. It's just I un I but at the same time the district commissioner has some questions on the road. It's two weeks. It's not the end of the world. I uh my hop my second hold is to continue for two weeks. Two weeks.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay, so we'll call for the vote. All those in favor of um Continuing. Continuing for two weeks, say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Nay. Right. So let's
Jack MarianoVice Chair
get
Kathryn StarkeyChair
let's
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Move approval staff's recommendation.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Right. And w and because the same thing's gonna happen, you won't know the alignment of the road. until they get into the process and start studying it. So we there won't be any difference next in two weeks. So just so everyone's clear on that. But we all understand the intent and what we're working to do here. Yes? Madam
Unidentified speakerVoice F
Chairman Mariano So David, the the suggestion about dealing with the alignment in the development agreement when that comes back. Does the does the The text the the conditions that have been passed out need to be modified to or would that just occur?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
It probably would just occur. We can make sure it happens, but in an abundance of caution you can add the word alignment um in the list of things that will be addressed in the development agreement. Yes. You could add the word alignment just to be safe. If I'll make the motion
Kathryn StarkeyChair
adjusted with the alignment. So the m the motion is amended to include the alignment. Yeah, okay. That that really will take care of what we're we're trying to do. Yeah, I think you should bring it back in the show. Okay. All in favor? Aye?
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Aye.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Opposed?
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Nay.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay, so pass
Jack MarianoVice Chair
three three to two.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
No it'll be same the same thing. The exact same thing. There's Nothing else that can be done.