PDE-25-7793

Every appearance1 of 2 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. 64% of 146 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong. 1 of the 2 appearances are not in any recording, so what was said at those is not here.

1. 1Jan 15, 2025
   Village of Pasadena Hills Planning and PolicyPC4Public hearingApproved

   Zoning Amendment (Regular) (Consent) - RLE Ranch MPUD – RLE Ranch Inc. – Inc.– Rezoning Request from AC … Villages of Pasadena Hills

   Approved minutes

   Approved the item per Staff’s recommendation.

   Open this item →No recording
2. 2Mar 11, 2025
   Board of County CommissionersP44Public hearingApproved

   Approved minutes

   Approved of Staff’s recommendation with the noted Condition to make the interconnection right-of-way of 50 feet in the one section they discussed.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 1:11:42
   ▶ 1:11:4226m

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   1:11:42P44, approved publication, 108 times, February 19, 2025, again, supplemented by a certified certificate, affidavit of certified mailing subsite questions.

   Planning and Development staff

   1:11:57Good afternoon. William from Million Planning Economic Development. This is item PD twenty-five seventy-seven ninety-three, the zoning amendment in the name of R Lee Ranch. A rezoning request from AC Agricultural to M PD Master Plan Union Development.

   1:12:17This project is located within three villages, within the villages Pasadena Hills, Village G, J, and K. The star indicates a rough location showing the entire extent of this master plan. It covers four hundred and forty-one acres.

   1:12:34Here is that rezoning request on four hundred and fourteen acres for six hundred and fourteen dwelling units. It extends f s from the south side of Kiefer Road to the north side of Overpass Road.

   1:12:49Here is that location map.

   1:12:56Here is the comprised villages master plan of all three villages. If you were looking at the screen you can see that the subject site is outlined in a light blue color. Most of the village is comprised of neighborhood general. It has some neighborhood edge along the wetlands in village K, as well as some core residential. as you move down into village J, which is indicated by the dark brown.

   1:13:21The neighborhood edge areas will be comprised of estate residential lots bordering the core reserve wetland there in Village K with a minimum 75 feet in total lot width. Single family detached makes up the lighter shade brown of the Neighborhood General. as well as town homes and the core residential there along um Village J. across from Hancart Road. There's one variation request with this MPUD from nine oh one sixty

   1:13:52eleven From street design and dedication requirements to not provide an interconnect. To the to the west due to those core reserve wetlands, they'll never be developed. You can see it's shaded there in green. The applicant is just proposing not to to make a stub out into the wetlands.

   StarkeyChair

   1:14:13Which ones are you talking about?

   Planning and Development staff

   1:14:15Sure.

   1:14:18It's actually I'll show you. Real quickly I when I bring up the master plan I think it'll make it a little bit more clear. But this MP MPUD spans the portions of three villages. It straddles the line in between all three. So it's a portion of village K, a portion of village G and a portion of village J. Type three, type two, and type one villages respectively. So th this is what I was this was what I was speaking to. This is a little more zoomed in. You can see the the boundary

   1:14:48of the villages there in those purple dotted lines. So the the yellow portions there, which is the lightest areas of residential where the estate lots are gonna go. Is the lowest density next to the wetland, and that's where the applicant is proposing not to have an interconnect because it would just be into the core reserve. that dark brown areas where the the townhomes will be slated. and then single family detached in the brown area. That hatched marking to the north. Leaves a provision for up to

   1:15:18twenty thousand square feet of commercial If the applicant chooses so in market conditions in phase two, which is allowable under the VOPH comprehensive plan per village. Uh there's twenty thousand square feet outside of village center set aside for neighborhood commercial use. On the right side of this master plan you can see the internal layout of the street network, which is inclusive of trails and paths that follow along the VOPH typical roadway sections, the 50AA and the 70AA typicals

   1:15:49respectively, as well as some trails that meander outside of those roadway typicals. connecting the different product types together. through the open space.

   StarkeyChair

   1:15:59Are are you saying there are there are trails there that are not just along the road?

   Planning and Development staff

   1:16:04Yes, ma'am.

   StarkeyChair

   1:16:06So what design what design criteria are they trying to get away from besides the interconnected where there's wetlands?

   Planning and Development staff

   1:16:14That that's the only variation from the code this application is seeking.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:16:17Madam Chairman Mariano. Would you go back to the previous slide? And by the way, th I think if you can do these slides and have markings on the the markings gotta be a little bit clearer. And but

   Planning and Development staff

   1:16:30these maps, I defer to uh Mr. Clark Hobby and his team for making the maps. Like a little shed a little bit of the blame there.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:16:41This one here? Yeah, so As I look up the

   1:16:47Yeah,

   StarkeyChair

   1:16:47I I'm just

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:16:48hard to point exactly. There there's a there's a thin, thin wetland

   StarkeyChair

   1:16:53in

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:16:53the midst of the whole thing.

   StarkeyChair

   1:16:55Um what's where you look at under Village G? Is that Village G? Well it's I can't follow your map.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   1:17:02Clarkson.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:17:06Okay. So go go to the go back to the other map though, please.

   StarkeyChair

   1:17:11So

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:17:12if you go just go good bring that arrow straight across. Straight across, straight across, right there. When you go from that point, there should be a connection there because it's a thin, thin wetland over there. Why wouldn't that connect? Or is it?

   Planning and Development staff

   1:17:25The the roadway or the wetland?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:17:28Yeah, you say you don't want to go through a wetland to

   Planning and Development staff

   1:17:30connect. No, so their their connection is they're proposing to not connect over here to this area. They are building this roadway segment north, which is a vision road, south to overpass, as well as building this vision road here. Okay, because they don't want to go through the wetland.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:17:43And what I'm saying is go up a little bit higher, right across the there's a thin little stretch of separation. No, go down. Right there. Go right across. Straight across.

   Planning and Development staff

   1:17:53Right

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:17:53here? Right in there. Well,

   StarkeyChair

   1:17:54between there and the room.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:17:55Between there and there. So at least a stub out to get to get through and let that person connect from there there. But it's a small little window.

   Planning and Development staff

   1:18:01Th this yellow space here?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:18:03No, the well the the there's two yellow spaces in the gr thin, thin little green space.

   Planning and Development staff

   1:18:08Oh right here?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:18:09Right there. There should be an interconnection that will eventually connect to there. That's that's I I can understand the third part.

   Planning and Development staff

   1:18:18I I can let the applicant speak to that. I don't want to make a decision for him, but I'm I can I can draw a

   StarkeyChair

   1:18:23pretty bridge. With character.

   Planning and Development staff

   1:18:30This comes with a recommendation from Planning Development and Economic Growth as well as the Village of Pascine Hills Planning and Policy Committee. I'm available for any questions.

   StarkeyChair

   1:18:37But I I do have a question for you. We don't have a b uh a concept a co a bonding or somewhat binding concept plan on this? Is that where? We don't know what we're gonna get.

   David Engel

   1:18:49David Engel, Planning and Economic Development Director, we are aggressively working on bringing forth a policy memorandum proposal to the board dealing with MPUD binding component plans. We had a lot of confusion with the TBBA and some of our stakeholders because there's a contradiction between binding and concepts. So what we've done is We have realigned the process to the existing land development code, requiring interpretive analysis for each of the provisions in the code to bind

   1:19:19the intent and the context of the board approval. So this plan has cross section, typical cross-sections, and design details of the roads, of the walkways, and also the typical lot layout. And it allows the applicant to have market flexibility to change the mix within the loom but not exceed or or provide a minimum. Uh the minimum has to be provided as well as not to exceed. It's a minimum and maximum to the type of flexibility that we're allowing. So

   1:19:50um we're meeting with the T B B A next week, but this is consistent with our draft proposal that we're bringing to the board.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   1:19:55It is?

   David Engel

   1:19:56Yes, ma'am. Thank you.

   Planning and Development staff

   1:20:04Real quick for the record, I did provide the updated loom as well as the applicant's advertisement to the clerk's office before this.

   StarkeyChair

   1:20:21What does it say?

   1:20:23The loom. Is that something we're s that we need to know about?

   Planning and Development staff

   1:20:31So it it made the the loom more strict it established those minimums and and maximums that David just spoke about instead of being able to convert at whatever trip rate there is minimums and maximums of what they can and can't convert.

   StarkeyChair

   1:20:43I you know, we're we're asking these questions just for the public's edification because we've chipped away and chipped away at the really cool plan that we had and I think we want to protect the integrity and the quality of what these villages are supposed to be. And um Yeah, we're still waiting on our big picture discussion of what we've done. Um but I know it's changed considerably when it first started. Uh But

   1:21:14so we we have concerns.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:21:16Uh Madam Chair, Commissioner, Clark, Hobby, Hobby and Hobby, PA 109 North uh North Brussel Street, Tampa, Florida have been sworn. And sworn at by my wife. Uh I just uh you asked about the loom. In this case, uh Commissioner, the MPUD is very specific about where the uses can go. The townhouses can only go in the core area, in the one village that was identified near Hancart. And uh the loom, the only reason

   1:21:46we even have one in this case is when we started off, we weren't exactly sure where the products were going to be limited except by the villages. And so we studied an unusually large amount of single-family detached. and the only conversion that can occur is from single family detached to the townhouses that we need in that one village core area. or to the um retail or

   1:22:16office that could occur up on Kiefer that staff pointed out to you in the very small area up there. That's the only conversions that can occur there. And we put min's and maxes for the townhouses and the single family uh per your instructions, but it does not change where the uses can go in any way. They are limited by both the master plan and the V OPH rules.

   StarkeyChair

   1:22:41Um can you uh going back to that road network Is that um Can I see that again?

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:22:49I'm gonna uh ask Christy Barrera to come up and help on the plan aspects since she spent a bunch of time working on it.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:23:03Christy Barrera with Height Design, 5904 Hampton Oakes Parkway, Tampa, Florida. I haven't sworn. And We have done a lot of work on this project. Taylor Morrison is the applicant. They have been uh Very helpful in getting us through this process. So as you can see on the left hand side, there are quite a few wetlands on the property and they're not large round wetlands. They are Strands of wetlands that go all the way through the site. So rather

   1:23:34than crossing those wetlands with streets, we have in key locations crossed those wetlands with multi-purpose trails. So the residents can get from one area to the other by you know foot, uh bike, or golf cart, not necessarily by vehicle. But we think that's a good compromise to make this a walkable community. So

   StarkeyChair

   1:23:58where is the where's the area that Commissioner Mariano was pointing out on this?

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:24:05So that is um in the northern portion of the site

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:24:12If you go to the previous map and see it better. I know you can't see it on this

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:24:15one. So the and it's confusing. Clark didn't make the maps, I made the maps. But we made them to uh be a uh They're

   StarkeyChair

   1:24:23kind of generic.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:24:25Yeah, so if you zoom in on your screen, you can see it much better. The map previously showed all of village K, all of Village J, and all of Village G. So, yes, Commissioner Mariano, you're correct. There is a smaller, a narrow portion of the Category One wetland that could be crossed, but that upland portion is not on our site. The portion of the upland that is within our property boundary is very narrow. It's currently planned for stormwater ponds and floodplain

   1:24:55ponds. So it's a very narrow area that we feel would be better for ponds than for a road. And it's not planned to be developed with residential units in that particular location.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:25:05Madam Chairman M the problem is when you're into connecting and you're trying to fit things in, it may not be good for your plan to be there. But the interconnection for otherwise people gotta drive all the way around to get places. If you can take a that connection point right there. That's a benefit for everybody who's trying to get to that village K over there without having to go all the way around. Ca was because it's surrounded by Wetland anyway.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:25:28Commissioner Mariano, uh we can we can talk about it and I understand what you're saying. I would point out for the the Commission's benefit, some of the the East Pasco commissioners are very aware of this. This was all part of the historic Kirkland Ranch. And they are trying to preserve all of the property you're talking about connecting to has been uh uh proposed for the last year and a half to be completely conserved and preserved pursuant to a state grant, wouldn't have any development on it. So we could hypothetically

   1:25:59on our piece of property right in there we could build some kind of stub, but it would be cutting off in the middle of our ponds and stubbing to another area where there's a category one wetland that that uh this no isn't working. Okay. Right. And they're they would if this ever gets developed over here, and again they're trying to preserve it all now. They would have to build another category one wetland crossing just to get to where our stub would be. It just We

   1:26:29didn't think it was very practical or meaningful.

   StarkeyChair

   1:26:32Where is the school? If that's Kirkland Ranch,

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:26:35up in the

   StarkeyChair

   1:26:36purple?

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:26:37Up in the purple area. Up here. Right there.

   StarkeyChair

   1:26:40That's where the high school is? Mm-hmm. So all that land is Kirkland Ranch? Yes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:26:44Mm-hmm. And so that's what they've been trying to conserve and uh State Representative Maggard, you know, asked that there be an a legislative appropriation last year and I think the governor shot it down. I think it actually made it through. the House and the Senate and was shot down, but they're still working on another conservation. policy there. Again, this isn't the end of the world for us, but also just think that isn't a super meaningful connection. I don't think it'll ever amount to anything.

   StarkeyChair

   1:27:10So those two roads are what roads are those that are going through there?

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:27:15The the road that runs up through that area is called North South Avenue B. It's one of the vision roads that comes up through our site all the way down here from Overpass, runs all the way up here and then there's another

   StarkeyChair

   1:27:27one. The one going through Kirkland Ranch.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:27:29Oh this? This it has three or four different names, but I believe this ends up being um It's n called New River and then it turns it Watergrass Parkway, Magnolia Island Parkway.

   StarkeyChair

   1:27:43But that's that'll go away obviously.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:27:46If there's no development, I don't know who would be building it. Um that's the one that when Ray Gav was at the school board commissioner that he was trying to make go away for a long time uh because it went right to the city.

   1:28:01Yeah. But we again we're not making any decision about that. I just I wanna make sure you all knew the connection you're talking about I don't think is ever really gonna amount to a hill of beans. Yeah.

   StarkeyChair

   1:28:15What's the blue line?

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:28:18The blue line, which is much clearer when you zoom in, is the actual property boundary line. So it's it's a very jagged piece of property. It goes from Kiefer on the north, Overpass on the south, Hancart on the east, and that very large category one wetland on the west.

   StarkeyChair

   1:28:37Well, um, you know, we have no guarantee that Curthland Rance is gonna be taken off and So I think I'm kinda thinking

   1:28:49I kinda wanna preserve that connection ability. What but what are your thoughts? And then if it does become that it's just a pedestrian access into into the preserve.

   1:29:05Speak up. It's just a just throwing it out there.

   Oakley

   1:29:07I don't know how much is gonna be happening with Kirkland Ranch unless it's get get funded for a preserve or something from the state. But they turned it down last year, so

   1:29:21it's gonna be hard to get that funded for that.

   StarkeyChair

   1:29:23So then it'll be developed and then and then Oh, then there's no interconnectivity, which is a problem. That's when our roads don't function.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:29:32And and just to bring up the point, in in the VOPH vision roads, there was no vision road interconnectivity across that very large category one wetland. So there were multiple north-south roads, but very purposefully that east-west road was stopped east of the Category One wetland. And then we'll see. Because they did not want to cross that environmental area.

   StarkeyChair

   1:29:56Well I could see that going north south, but east west. Just accessing all that yellow to the west is something that we should think about.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:30:08Correct. So east west street B. Which button? The top one?

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:30:17Yeah, one more time.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:30:19Okay. So this street here ends at North South Avenue B, does not continue west. So that was very purposeful when VOPH master roadway plan was created. It does continue farther east and goes up to what we're now calling J. Ben Harrell Parkway and goes up to the District Park. The thought was it would be better not to cross that category one wetland.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:30:52I mean if I get a piece of property been to the legislature twice, shut down twice, I mean mean I don't know how I can consider that not getting developed. I mean you've got a village in there, you've got a road going through there. And if we don't put that connection in It's and it's this narrowest connection of them all. You you miss a great opportunity. Otherwise everyone's gonna drive all the way up and around to get to that point circle and back down.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   1:31:18Agreed.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:31:20So Commissioner, I I I spoke with our client. We can build it, but I I just want to be clear to the board what's happening here. You're talking about us stubbing something between where we're supposed to be building retention ponds.

   StarkeyChair

   1:31:33Yeah, you chose to put it there.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:31:37That's where the lowest part of the land is. But if we put it in there, it's literally going to be like a hundred foot stub, and the only way they'll be using it, because they don't have enough buildable property east of the category wetland is if have a impact to the category wetland to cross it. It's it just I in our business I think it's highly unlikely that anybody's gonna ever do that for that amount of buildable property. But if that's what the board you know is insistent upon, we can

   1:32:07do that. It's just I mean it's a use it's gonna require us underutilizing the area that we would normally use for floodplain compensation and ponds for a interconnection that I don't think will ever be meaningful. But if that's what the board's pleasure is, I suppose we'll have to do it.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:29I need more yes, I mean it's

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:32:32Believe me, we're struggling putting all these little pieces of the puzzles coming together here. But literally you've got a village K type three, if it's coming in that way, and it does come in again, we're back to the same thing of you lack of c connectivity. If the stub's there When the guy comes in, if he does all the building, we can say, Okay, we're gonna have you connect to the property over there. We can make that part of the situation there.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:32:55I I understand. What what will happen though is we'll come back in twenty years and we'll have a hundred and twenty five foot stub into nowhere. But I understand what the board wants. So if that's what the board wants, that's what we'll do.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:33:08Is the board asking for a construction of that stub or just the right of way so that somebody could later?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:33:16I don't know.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:33:21What he's asking is is it sufficient if we provide the right of way or an easement, which we would rather do than having to permit the construction of a road?

   StarkeyChair

   1:33:31There's no reason to build a road until they develop until the

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:33:35We would much rather do that would make it a lot easier on us. Because again,

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:33:38and and then V O P H would be funding the road anyway.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:33:42No, not on that's not a road that's identified on the master roadway plan.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:33:46But village K is developed. You can require them to build it. Yeah, the other person could

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:33:54build it if we

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:33:55give

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:33:55the right away.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:33:56Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:33:57We'll we'll we'll do that, Commissioner.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:34:02That was the theory. Okay, as long as we're gonna if we're gonna get there, okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:34:07We're happy to answer any other questions you all might have.

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:09Yeah, um Commissioner Weightman and I I I have more comment on that. Okay. Well you want to finish your Mindset. Well I just wanna say um if it does become a preserve, I think that could be an entrance, so I wanna say if it does become a preserve we need a pedestrian access into the preserve. Um we did that at Starkey Ranch. We have to do that. you know, bunch of entrances into the park. And if that's a park then that would let That'd

   1:34:40be great for this community, but there should be access into the into the park from there.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:34:45Commissioner, why don't we do this? We'll we'll say that the right of way that we're gonna provide for the county's benefit in there will be fifty feet wide and that will match your cross section that would allow for pedestrian and uh road connections for vehicles.

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:59Yeah. Is that good? Okay. All right, uh this is a public hearing. Is there anyone go ahead? Oh sure, go ahead.

   WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   1:35:09The the loom in the loom.

   1:35:14The the twenty thousand square feet of commercial then that's in the potentially that they could loom the project could loom out.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:35:22Right.

   WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   1:35:22Um what do you think the probability is of that? Kind of hard to tell.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:35:29Uh i you would think over the long haul where the only place this can occur and it's har we don't have the map up now. We're confusing the heck out of the easy. the people running the Elmo and everything. But it it it's up at where North South Avenue B will meet Kiefer. And so that's a collector and a collector road over time. I don't think there's gonna be any demand for that site to be retail, I would think in the next five years or so, but it could be and we don't know when it will even develop for residential.

   1:36:00And the rules and B O P H allow you to have in certain villages up to three village centers, up to twenty thousand square feet. And so we just put that in there as an option. in case, you know, the the demand is ever warranted and the property hasn't been developed, but it's a very small piece, Christy, do you remember how big it is?

   WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   1:36:20I'm hopeful that It doesn't loom out, is what I'm saying. So all right. That's all. Okay. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   1:36:29Thank you.

   1:36:31Okay, is there anyone else is there anyone who wishes to speak to the site?

   1:36:39Okay, to the board.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:36:41Move approval with the noted condition to make the interconnection right away for fifty feet and that one section discussed. Second.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   1:36:50Okay. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? None? All right, you got it.

   1:36:56Madam Chair, just for the record about eighteen forty

   StarkeyChair

   1:37:01Oh you said there was an error?

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   1:37:02No. We just want to record that the course office received a revised village plan and an ex parte from you as to this item which is different from the the original just distributed.

   StarkeyChair

   1:37:19Okay. No,