PDE-26-0016

Every appearance2 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. 72% of 396 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong. 2 of the 4 appearances are not in any recording, so what was said at those is not here.

1. 1Jan 8, 2026
   Planning CommissionP8Public hearingNo disposition in the minutes

   Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Regular) … PD – Providing for Transmittal of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment … Map 2-9(81) Elite 52 PD; And Providing For Additional Text Amendments As Necessary For Internal Consistency; Providing For A Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date. PD.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 19:39
   ▶ 19:3953m

   Barbara

   19:39Okay. PCA is comprehensive plan amendment, CPA 24, parentheses 03, Elite 52 PD, providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map, map 2-15 and sheet 12 from AG, Agricultural, and AGR, Agricultural Rural. to PD plan development on approximately 156 acres of real property located north of State Road 52, approximately 0.6 mile east of the intersection of State Road 52 and U.S. Highway 41.

   20:10and a text amendment creating sub-area policy flu 7.1.81 Elite 52 PD and a map amendment to the future land use map 2-9, adding sub-area map 2-9, parentheses 81, Elite 52 PD, to be presented by sir. All right. Thank you.

   Moody

   20:35Good afternoon, Planning Commission Members. Gianna German, Planning Development and Economic Growth.

   20:43Today I have excuse me, item P eight is PDE 260016, a comprehensive plan amendment in the name of CPA twenty-three o three Elite 52 PD.

   20:56The applicant is proposing to amend the future land use from AG agricultural and AGR agricultural role to P D Plan Development to allow for a mixed-use development on approximately 156 acres, situating the 175,000 square feet of commercial and retail space and the 120-room hotel towards the front of the property, abiding State Road 52, and 108 single-family detached units as well. Hello? The Northeastern portions of the property are located in a rural

   21:27transition area. However, within the binding concept plan that will be explained on the companion MPUD to this item, the applicant is not proposing to develop within the rural transition area. This property is located on the north side of State Road 52 and east of US 41, and there is a sub-area policy being created, policy 7.1, excuse me. Yeah, 7.1.2. The name of Elite 52, Elite SR52 PD. As previously mentioned, there is a companion rezoning an MPUD in the name of RZ7811.

   22:00This property is located in the North Market area and portions of the site are located within the rural transition area.

   22:09Here is an aerial showing US 41 to the west and state road 52 on the southern frontage of the subject site.

   22:20A context map noting that the role transition area encompasses portions of the proposed project and that there are numerous MPDs in the surrounding area. Longleaf, Tibbetts Land at Gowers, and Sand Ridge MPUD, all to the west. There are similar proposals within a mile from the subject site to that of the applicants.

   22:43A transportation map again showing US Highway 41 to the west, State Road 52 on the southern frontage of the subject site, and there is a 12-foot multi-use path currently in the design phase on the proposed north side of State Road 52, which does abut the subject site.

   23:03The current feature land use. We have AGR to the east, AG to the north, and then Conerton Newtown to the south, and Res3 to the west. And then the proposed future land use of PD.

   23:21The sub-area policy again highlighting the 175,000 square feet of retail office and commercial, 120-room hotel, 108 single-family detached, and again stating that the southern portion of the project of the subject site shall contain non-residential uses.

   23:41The proposed amendment is consistent with the following comprehensive plan policies.

   23:50And we find the proposed amendment consistent with excuse me, we ask that you find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and recommend approval to the Bourneham County Commissioners. And I am here if you have any questions.

   GreyChair

   24:02Okay. Do

   GirardiVice Chair

   24:02we have

   24:03any questions?

   24:05Mr. Chairman did you wanna open up the public hearing for P9 as well and put these together?

   GreyChair

   24:11Probably makes sense, yeah.

   GirardiVice Chair

   24:13Then you probably want to have staff present Penon first. Okay.

   GreyChair

   24:27Who's gonna be presenting PI? Well

   Planning and Development staff

   24:40Good afternoon, Planning Commission members. William from Million Planning Development Economic Growth. This is the companion rezoning to the CPA that Ms. Gianna just presented. This is the Elite SR 52 MPUD PDE 267811. This is a rezoning request from AR Agricultural Residential and AC Agricultural District to MPUD Master Plan Development District to allow for maximum development. Of 108 single family detached homes, 175,000

   25:10square feet of commercial retail, and 120 hotel rooms and associated infrastructure on approximately 156.2 acres. This is in central Pasco County, 0.6 miles east of the intersection of State Road 52 and U.S. Highway 41.

   25:28The location map.

   25:31An aerial of the site.

   25:35The current future land use and the current zoning. This is the MPUD master plan, the red area indicating commercial, the yellow indicating residential, and to the south you can see the a little bit of orange along State Route 52. That is indicative of right-of-way dedication based on the 60% design plans from F DOT's widening of SR fifty-two in this area.

   26:04I'll get a little bit more in depth whenever I get to the concept plan. I know that the there's a couple more things I'd like to address that didn't fall within the master plan's purview. On this context map, I have highlighted here for the benefit of the Planning Commission the runway protection zone and the approach surface of the pilot country airport. The approach surface highlighted in green, and the runway protection zone indicated by that dashed black and white.

   26:34Polygon there. You can see to the to the northwest is the Talavera MPUD, which is 840 dwelling units. Just to the west of the airport exists a current RMH zoning, which has roughly 108 single-family detached dwelling units built within that R1MH zoning. Um Roughly forty foot lots there. In red you can see the subject site and to the south of State Road 52 exists a portion of the Conerton MPD that's

   27:05currently been used for a wetland mitigation bank.

   27:11I would like to to highlight here off screen um the airport influence area exists according to L D C Section six oh five which governs the airports in Pasco County. Um this site does fall within The AIA And within the AIA, I just like to highlight the compatibility table from the Land Development Code as it relates to this proposal. particularly to some of the uses that are found along State Route 52. The land development

   27:41code with these uses, particularly the residential, the single-family dwelling units proposed, as well as the hotel and the commercial, are a permissible use pursuant to LDC Section 605 and Table 605-1.

   27:56This is the binding concept planning.

   28:00Before this this item almost came before the Planning Commission and it had been continued for a number of months, uh the original proposal was for 300 platted townhomes. In this case, the applicant worked with some of the surrounding stakeholders to decrease some of the residential density that would have been found next to the airport and in Lou switched to this 108. single family detached plan with the larger lots indicated in purple, those 60-foot lots to be adjacent

   28:31to the airport with an increased buffering element on the on the rear side of those homes.

   28:41This is a zoomed-in version of what the enhanced buffer detail is. You can see that there's an increased height of the wall outside of what's usually found in the land development code where it usually speaks to between six to eight feet, as well as an increased amount of shade trees and evergreen shrubs. It should be pointed out that generally residential uses don't have to buffer against one another and that this is uh above and beyond what the land development code would have required.

   29:13There are two variations from the land development code associated with this MPUD, one from 901611 street design and dedication requirements. Applicants proposing not to provide an interconnect to the north or to the west. To the north exists a large category wetland. And to the west is the pilot country airport. And finally, from LDC Section 8056, restrictions on post-development wetlands and upland buffers, this is for those portions of wetland that fall within the non-residential portion of the MPUD that if under single

   29:43ownership those entities will be required for the maintenance thereof of the common area's wetlands. This comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions from the Fama. Uh Planning Development Economic Growth and I'm available for any questions. Okay. Anybody? I also would like to state on the record, since we did decrease the density of the residential, Mr. Devine did provide an updated school impact analysis, which is less student generation

   30:13than the previous 300 Platte Town Homes, which will be submitted to the clerk's office and attached for the Board of County Commissioners. We also received letters of opposition from the public, which have also been sent to the clerk's office. Okay, thank you.

   Connected City

   30:24That that was the only thing I was gonna make a note of is the um looks like the updated ones in the comprehensive plan amendment um companion item, but it looks like it was the old one was included in the rezoning

   Planning and Development staff

   30:36I got started a little early with approvals before the holidays, uh before I got that from Mr. Divine, so a little bit on my over eagerness, but it will certainly be attached to the BCC.

   Connected City

   30:44Yeah, 'cause it looks like the updated ones there in the Comprehensive plan notes dated uh ninth of October twenty five. Yes, sir. Thank you William.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   30:54Well well just one quick question for you. Um regarding the airport zones I know you had the slide in there and I hel that's definitely helpful, I'm glad you had it in there. But isn't part of the property in the airport zone in addition to the airport influence area?

   Planning and Development staff

   31:07Uh let me so this is the the various zones that are identified in six oh five. So the RPZ And the approach surface there are don't fall on this subject property, which are your more restrictive areas in six oh five. And then in a two mile radius is where that AIA exists, which this this property is inclusive of, and that's where this table came into effect that said what the uh permissible uses would be.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   31:36Isn't there another zone in between those two in the AIA? Because I think if you go to table six or five point one, there's a there's an A Z column. And the hotels are additional review requirements. In that section. I think at the end of the day y it'll be okay and I think that those I additional items get reviewed during site plan or so than during zoning. I just wanted to point that out before it goes to the board. So maybe you can just look into that and

   Planning and Development staff

   32:06Absolutely, I certainly will. Mr.

   GirardiVice Chair

   32:08Jardy, there actually is a qu there's a condition, um, condition fifty-four. But I think addresses that issue. Okay. It says that it is in the A Z and then it's subject to additional review at the time site plan. Yeah.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   32:23I noticed that. I just wanted to point out 'cause this in the in the presentation area gets it's a little confusing, so

   Planning and Development staff

   32:28I can certainly make that more clear. Okay. Thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   32:31Very good.

   Planning and Development staff

   32:33Any

   GreyChair

   32:34applicant?

   Barbara Wilhite

   32:37Good afternoon. Barbara Will Hight, 6327 Grand Boulevard for the applicant suffering from a cold. That's what you get for stopping working and trying to vacation. So bear with me. This project was on your agenda at one point. My client asked me to put it on hold so he could meet with the pilot country neighborhood. As staff has told you, we we were in for 300 platted townhomes. After those meetings, we went back and

   33:07had a lot of meetings as a team and the client directed. directed us to change the application for 108 single family detached homes instead of the town homes. The those consist of sixty foot lots. We were very thoughtful of putting the sixty foot lots where we put our sixty foot lots and fifty foot lots. And we have the enhanced buffer that we always said from day one that we would do to pilot country. What's interesting is if you look at pilot country to the west, it's res three land use. And our proposed

   33:38density now, before with townhomes, was 5.5 dwelling units per net acre, and now it's 2.0. So that's a big change. Um it's definitely consistent with with pilot country. I zoned both the properties on the west side of pilot country, one being the single family detached neighborhood that's adjacent to pilot country um on their western boundary, and those are forty foot lots. I also zoned apartments

   34:09directly adjacent to um pilot country on their west and those were also found consistent and compatible. I think the towns were absolutely consistent and compatible, uh given both the history of the zonings in the area and the area as well as the airport ordinance. But again the client, you know, I'm I'm sure this folks are still not happy and and don't want us to develop, but I think what we've come up with is a very good project. Um given the area, if this is

   34:39a going to be a either four or six lane arterial. It's you know, it's going to be a large roadway. You can see how it already is developing up to this point. Um so we try to come up with something very thoughtful. As far as airport compatibility, yes, it is in the A Z zone. It is compatible and consistent and we we we um are complying with everything. Fortunately, as we bring this zoning forward, we have that ordinance. When I had the other two zonings, we didn't have that ordinance.

   35:09So it was a lot of How should it be done? What should be allowed? A lot of work went into that. Fortunately the county did the airport protection ordinance and looked at and studied each one of these airports, studied what's compatible, and put all in an ordinance for us to follow. So now it's not as much of a question of what should we approve here, because we have an ordinance that says what can be approved and still protect and a balance, still protect the airport and the airport community, but also allow a a project. So I think we've

   35:40we've um We worked hard on this one and we uh hope we can get your support. I have my team here. I we look forward to answering questions from the public. Um and thank you.

   GreyChair

   35:51Okay, thank you Barbara. Any questions?

   35:57All right. So who's on the first

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   36:01on the list? The first individual signed up to speak is Mr. Craig Kanati.

   GirardiVice Chair

   36:06Okay. And I'm not sure who's keeping time, but they technically have six minutes since they're speaking to two items.

   GreyChair

   36:14Okay.

   36:17So we need your name and your address please.

   Greg Connity

   36:19Good afternoon. My name is uh Greg Connity. And I own two pieces of property on the north side of the proposed And this um

   GreyChair

   36:29Huh, sorry, Greg, we need your address too.

   Greg Connity

   36:32My address is [address removed]. Mm-hmm. And that's in Spring Hill. Okay, thank you. Mm-hmm.

   GreyChair

   36:40Go ahead.

   Greg Connity

   36:40My my concern is that uh I've lived there since uh nineteen ninety four. I own I live on a 10-acre lot adjacent to the property and I own 60 acres that is adjacent to the property with my sister.

   36:57I've seen flooding there many times back in 1997, 2008. And most recently the two hurricanes that came in 2024. I'm worried that 'cause m the water has come all the way up to my house a couple of times. D taken away any kind of area where the water can go is just gonna drive it more in my direction and I don't wanna have any flooding up towards my house. And that's my main concern right now, is

   37:27just that and You know, I'm running cattle over there on my property and I don't wanna have Cows getting out and getting into somebody's neighborhood and it would just be very bad. So those are my main concerns and um I'm not in opposed to growth, I know it's happening. And uh so that's all I really got to say. But thank you for giving me the time.

   GreyChair

   37:52Oh thank you for coming. Appreciate that. And I'll try to get you some answers.

   Greg Connity

   37:56Okay.

   GreyChair

   37:59Who next?

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   38:00Mr. Chair, the next individual signed up to speak is Dennis Henderson.

   38:07Yeah.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   38:12Hello, my name's uh Dennis Hurtenstein. I live at [address removed]. Um As a general contractor whose livelihood depends on new development, I'm not here today in opposition of development. I'm here to advocate for a responsible development through a cohesive transition and zoning changes between properties. Both the existing subdivisions on each side of the proposed development are zoned AR-1, AR-5, and ER-2. these types

   38:42of AR developments are becoming increasingly rare in Pasco County. I'd like for the board to consider an approval of this project with a few conditions which would go a long way to addressing some of these quality of life issues. that would affect the current residents in the area. Number one, high density homes. Uh homes built on this size lot this close together would most likely have a negative impact on the current home values and through which overcrowding, traffic issues, school overcrowding,

   39:13which Land O' Lakes High School is already at 111% capacity, this would increase to 112% according to the applicants data provided to this board. Life safety. Spread of fire between structures close built close together, which according to the U.S. Fire Administration 10-year trend, 2014 to 2024, show a significant jump in residential fires. Item number two, flooding. previous gentleman just mentioned. I mean we already have lots in part of the

   39:43country that are that are affected by flooding from this property. Number three, you know, the hotel. You know, this type of business It typically doesn't remain viable in an area such as this one over time. It'll start to attract to criminal activity as the standards start to decline. Um in closing I'd like to In closing, I I believe the following conditions placed on this project would help ease some of my concerns and those of my neighbors. Number one, density. Um

   40:14Density of more than one to two family homes per acre with a front and rear setback of thirty foot and a side of fifteen. Number two. Um No wood or vinyl fence along the western boundary of the site, but would require a continuous minimum six-foot-tall engineer concrete wall to be built to withstand the minimum 130 mile-an-hour wind loads and a screen buffer of 15-foot wide consisting of shade trees and shrubs in accordance with Chapter 900

   40:45of Land Development Code. I would also like to see a bond of some value, maybe $5 million or something, put into place for a minimum of 10 years to address any kind of future flooding issues. Uh number four, you know, no type of hotel included in this in this project. And um I'd like to see some current uh traffic and put public safety surveys, you know, um before the project moves forward. That's all. Thank you.

   GreyChair

   41:13All right, thank you. Any questions?

   41:18Hey, thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   41:20Next. Mr. Chairman the next individual signed up to speak is Caitlin Buell.

   GreyChair

   41:26Okay. Caitlin, can we have your name and address please?

   Caitlin Buell

   41:30Absolutely. Caitlin Buell, [address removed].

   GreyChair

   41:33Thank you.

   Caitlin Buell

   41:35My name is Caitlin Buell, as I said. My backyard borders this planned or proposed development. I'm a flight nurse on a helicopter. My husband is a professional pilot and in his spare time he teaches other people how to fly airplanes. He even taught me how to fly an airplane, which is impressive. Um all that to say our personal and professional lives are wrapped up in aviation. We bought our first home here in Pilot Country and there is truly no other place like it. I would like to say thank you to all

   42:05of you for doing what you do. I'm grateful that we share the goal of maintaining Pilot Country as a lively general aviation airport and as a resource for the residents of Pilot Country. Or sorry, Pasco County. You know what I mean. Yeah. Um all that said, I think putting people's houses under low flying air traffic in an other in an otherwise rural area is bananas. I would encourage all of you to find some people in the public's parking lot to talk to about this, because it's not just me, pretty much everyone

   42:36outside this room thinks this is bananas. But here we are talking about it, so I will move on. I have some concerns that I hope will be easy fixes. As the development is proposed now, it would decrease the privacy and thus the property value of my home, as well as all but one of the pilot country homes that border the area. I see there's a buffer planned, which is great, but unfortunately, with as small as these lots are, any two-story house would be high enough and close

   43:06enough to the fence to see into our yards and our homes. So having five or six second story windows looming overhead would negatively affect our use and enjoyment of our backyard. If you look at the developer's drawing, You'll notice One House does not have this problem. The guy pushing this rezoning effort lives in the house that backs up to the park. He has protected his own home from the decrease in privacy that he is imposing on it on his neighbors. That's

   43:36great for him. That's his right to propose it. I support him in following his heart. I hope his dreams stay big, his worries stay small, and he never needs to carry more than he can hold. But I would like to ask you to help achieve a similar consideration of privacy for the rest of us. If it could be specified in the plan that the houses bordering Pilot Country would be limited to a single story, that would allay my concerns. Not having any two-story houses right at the border of pilot country would

   44:06make the buffer effective at preserving everyone's privacy and could allow the development to move forward if that is really what you want.

   GreyChair

   44:14Okay. Thank you. Any questions?

   GirardiVice Chair

   44:18I think I'm not sure if I understood what you're saying.

   44:24gentleman that owns the home adjacent to the park is the applicant? Or

   44:31Who was that gentleman?

   Caitlin Buell

   44:32Mark Mark uh twelve of them.

   GirardiVice Chair

   44:36And he's the applicant for the current zoning?

   Caitlin Buell

   44:38Yes.

   GirardiVice Chair

   44:40Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   44:48All right. Mr. Chairman the next individual sign up to speak is Chris Buell.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   45:02Thanks for everybody's time. Uh Christopher Buell, [address removed]. I'll uh uh give different concerns than the what of those that have already been brought up. Uh main one for me is um m airpo airport noise and that those that are gonna be moving into these areas are fully aware um beforehand before they um

   45:29Noise for airports, especially small ones like ours, are a big risk for us maintaining our property, our ability to use uh the airport itself. Um I'm curious if an FA noise study has been done recently so that Um people moving into these uh this new neighborhood have an accurate understanding of what they'd be exposing themselves to. Um I know recently um And now we have a private jet

   45:59that is now based at the airport that's also related to this um the applicants for this this project. Um so th th those are the big things that concern me. Um the water and the the flooding that Craig brought up. is also a big concern. We see that quite a bit with the bigger storms already. I know that's a concern for our neighbors that are on the northwest side of Pilot Country that had that more recent development of similar size and density put in over there. They've had

   46:29significant flooding issues since that project. Again, kind of plowing over the the wetland area that was there before. Um so those are two of my big concerns with with the rezoning and the development just to the east of Pilot Country.

   GreyChair

   46:44Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Pierre. Okay, thank you very much.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   46:53Mr. Chairman the last individual we have pre-registered to speak is Mark Budd.

   GreyChair

   46:58Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   47:01Mark Budd, [address removed]. I live at uh by the country. I actually live um just south of Mark Twal Twalhoven, one of the applicants. And um

   47:20I share all the same previous people. Pretty much verbatim, all their concerns. Okay. And uh property values, privacy, all those same things. And I'd also like to see if this project were to move forward, either decrease in density or Definitely limited one-story homes. just to the uh east of Pilot Country and that border.

   47:51Potentially a larger buffer zone. Anything to keep our privacy that we currently have that'll be already somewhat compromised. Take that into account. Uh also in the in the verbiage, I can't remember which document it was, it talks about uh notifying these two potential owners that they can't uh sue or complain or anything about

   48:21uh the airport operations, the noise, any liability issues. any safety issues that they might be concerned about that are giving that all up. But that it says to the airport owner. Uh bear in mind that Every member of the HOA is an airport owner. I because the HOA owns a portion of the airport. And and I would like to see that wording. Yeah. uh associated with

   48:51being a donor.

   48:55Thank you.

   GreyChair

   48:59That's the last speaker.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   49:01Yes, Mr. Chairman all individuals pre registered have been called.

   GreyChair

   49:04Okay. Is there anybody that would like to speak that has had an opportunity? Okay.

   Cindy Buckle

   49:20Cindy Buckle, [address removed]. And I totally understand what these folks are saying about Pilot Country. I'm familiar with the area. I have seen the flooding out there, not just from hurricanes, but just from regular rains. I also live near Zephyrhills Airport, which is where Skydive City is. I've lived there for a long time and never had an issue with Skydive City. But

   49:51They extended the runway not for Skydive City but for the airport, Zephyrhills Airport. And since they've done that, we have seven planes flying barely above our tree line. And I have contacted FAA. I have a contact at FAA that I will share with these people so they can talk to them. The bakery that's going up right now has already complained about how slow how low those planes are flying in.

   50:22There's absolutely no reason for them to fly barely above our treetops. I have several videos of this. There are no communications whatsoever at Zephyrhills Airport. They have a little metal building that's opened on Monday through Friday and everybody else who flies just takes off and flies whenever they want. There's no kind of Tower, there's no kind of communications except pilot

   50:52to pilot, and that does not happen often. I have spoken with one pilot that crashed On ash. I actually went and spoke to him and he told me he tried to raise someone at Zephyrhills Airport several times at 6 PM in the afternoon and was not able to. Fortunately, he was able to nosedive in a cow pasture after he took out fences, residential fences, and barely missed

   51:23a dwelling. So Putting homes in a in a two or three story resort where planes fly, you're looking for a catastrophic incident. And I can tell you right now, I'm a retired firefighter paramedic. And I know Pasco County has absolutely zero aviation training. Hulk County does, and Hernando County does. So should there be a crash? Should there be a catastrophic

   51:53crash? You're gonna have to call in help from everywhere. And this is a fact, this is coming from my FAA contact.

   GreyChair

   52:03Okay, thank you.

   52:07Is there anybody else like to speak?

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   52:12No one on the list, right? Anybody on WebEx? Okay. Barbara?

   Barbara Wilhite

   52:25For the record, Barbara Willheight again on behalf of the applicant. Um listened to the public comment, anticipated a lot of their comment um when we were When we first put this project together and then when we put it back together again. I would say for our neighbor to the north, if you look at our binding concept plan, along our northern boundary is a pond and wetlands. So we have no home adjacency uh home adjacent to that north northern boundary. Um with regard to the right-of-way. Could

   GreyChair

   52:52you put that back up on the screen so they everybody can see it?

   53:01Sorry Barbara.

   Barbara Wilhite

   53:02No, absolutely. It's always good to see.

   GreyChair

   53:05Yeah.

   Barbara Wilhite

   53:07So you can see along the northern is where our we put our pond and and the wetlands are. The the the density you hear from, we heard that as well. That's where we changed from townhomes to single family detached, um from a five point five units per um net acre to two. Yeah. Buffering, we right from the beginning looked at the buffering and proposed an enhanced buffer. Uh we hear that single story versus two-story

   53:37comment a lot. Um I hear it a lot. The single story and two-story homes coexist next to each other, near each other everywhere. Um the airport noise there are Conditions fifty four, fifty five, and fifty six that deal with the disclosures regarding the noise. We worked with um I worked with and we worked with the county and putting that ordinance together to get those disclosures right and so if there was something that

   54:07the disclosure language wasn't if there was some comment on that I would be happy to listen to you know what what maybe should be added to that but we are following the ordinance that spent quite a bit of time years in developing the ordinance to come up with what we should do here. Flooding, you know, with regard to flooding. We hear it, we understand it. It's always good to hear it. Always hear neighbors talking about it 'cause it is an important issue. You all know the process that we go through to to get permitted on a project like this

   54:38relative to um stormwater issues.

   GirardiVice Chair

   54:41Mm-hmm. Could I ask you a question about your your buffer? Um

   54:46And I I don't know, I mean I realize it's residential to residential, but is there a reason that

   54:54that you're planting shrubs outside of the wall as opposed to something that might screen the higher The hires homes like trees, you know.

   Barbara Wilhite

   55:07Let me let me bring Chrissy up.

   GirardiVice Chair

   55:10Because an eight foot wall is not gonna screen a thirty five foot home, but trees over time might in fact screen a thirty five or better screen a thirty five foot home.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   55:22Christy Barrer with height design. So a row of shrubs is required. We're putting them on the outside of our fence, so it's Screening the fence a little bit, and then we're putting twice as many trees behind the fence as would be required in the standard buffer. So X twice as many trees, shrubs on the pilot country side of the fence. And then an eight foot fence or wall instead of a minimum six foot

   55:53fence or wall or hedge or berm that is permitted in the type B buffer.

   GirardiVice Chair

   55:59So what what kind of trees are you planting this?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   56:03We don't know the exact type of trees. Um I'm not sure if the Land Development Code has a specific type button

   GirardiVice Chair

   56:15I'm just trying to figure out are you planting trees that would screen a thirty five foot home?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   56:22I don't believe that that is level of details in the land adolment code and that level of detail is not in our proposed buffer at this time either.

   Christopher Poole

   56:38W Barbara, would there be an opposition to single story homes on on that property line? I mean those

   Barbara Wilhite

   56:45are six equal lots, right? I don't think that's a reasonable ask. Okay.

   Christopher Poole

   56:50Those are sixty foot lozo, correct?

   Barbara Wilhite

   56:52Yes. Okay. But if we if we would be happy to sharpen our pencils on the buffer. Um Yeah, something that you had to do.

   GirardiVice Chair

   57:02I was asking whether you could commit to trees that would actually provide better screening.

   Barbara Wilhite

   57:08I I Rive comes to mind. I know we did a specific buffer um over at uh on Ridge Road next for the apartments next to the homes on at Tanglewood and Ridge. So y maybe there is something I Yeah, Oh. So I I wouldn't mind sharpening our pencil on the buffer. Yeah, we've done it before. I can't imagine it's make or break for this project. Um we can sharpen our pencil on the buffer and look for I know I think it's Aravaida that

   57:38we came up with for another project that's fast growing and it fills in. Right. Yeah. So we'd be happy to I would be happy to commit to sharpen our pencil immediately before the board meeting and come up with uh maybe some more specifics as to what we're gonna plant.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   57:58David, I have a question for you.

   58:02We got asked the other day at the board hearing on the tree ordinance how it works with clearing agricultural property and then coming and applying for a rezoning how's that work?

   GirardiVice Chair

   58:15So, um Yeah, the general rule is that if you are Clearing property under an agricultural exemption that you have to basically wait five years before you can submit an application development for development unless you're gonna mitigate for that. It's that tree removal under the eye exemption. You can you can turn around and immediately develop after you clear it under an eye

   58:45exemption, but you're gonna have to mitigate for that tree removal.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   58:49Hmm. Okay. And that's done at the site plan level?

   GirardiVice Chair

   58:54Yes.

   58:56So you're not prohibited from clearing internet exemption and then developing it just you're gonna have to mitigate for it. I see,

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   59:06and then how do we determine how many trees were taken out?

   GirardiVice Chair

   59:09You use aerial photos from the

   59:15and or representative samples from um trees in the area. But we can use aerial photos from To determine the trees that were

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   59:26there? Yeah, it appears up in the northwest corner of this development that a significant amount of clearing happened between

   59:37twenty twenty and twenty twenty three. So if that was done under some wetland impact was done there as well.

   GirardiVice Chair

   59:44So if that was done under an exemption and that they haven't met the required time frame, they'll have to mitigate for those. Wait, can you put up the trees property

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   59:52appraiser and map?

   Barbara

   59:59Sorry, can you put it up on that?

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:00:01I said can you put up the property appraiser, ma'am?

   1:00:25So If you can put on the 2020 aerial photograph.

   1:00:37If you go in the upper the the four squares down on the bottom. I'm sorry, you're looking at the yeah.

   Connected City

   1:00:50Is that twenty twenty?

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:00:51Yeah.

   1:00:55You can see up in the northwest corner of the property it's all very n keep going north with your cursor. Right to the left of where your cursor is. Yeah, right to the right. Yep, right there. Now flip to the 2023

   1:01:16Yeah, they're all gone. Mm-hmm.

   GirardiVice Chair

   1:01:23So again they'll have to if that was

   1:01:27If it doesn't meet the terms of the ordinance they'll have to mitigate for those removal by removal.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:01:33We will acknowledge the ordinance on the record. I don't know anything else about it. Okay.

   GirardiVice Chair

   1:01:43Maybe some of that mitigation will be planting trees in this buffer.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:01:47I would be looking at the northeast corner of that area that was cleared because that looks like it was a wetland that was impacted as well.

   Christopher Poole

   1:02:01Christy along those lines is I I can tell in the information, is there a formal determination of the the wetland lines or is there not currently?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:02:11I don't believe the wetlands have been formally set yet. I don't believe Swift Mutt has been out. So that will happen before the site plan is approved.

   Christopher Poole

   1:02:20Okay, do you anticipate any impacts here? site plan for that?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:02:24Very minimal, if any. Um I'd have to go back and look at the plan, but um these are category one wetlands for the most part and so we were not in planning on impacting them at all.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:02:34Okay. Looks like there may have already been some.

   Christopher Poole

   1:02:39Yeah, to John's point.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:02:44We'll definitely get the experts out there and they'll let us know if any have been impacted or not.

   GreyChair

   1:03:00Well I think in order to deal with some of the concerns that uh David mentioned and some of the neighbors have brought up, I think it's important to I think you've already said that you'll look into Putting a heavy tree line there. of trees that will mitigate the

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:03:20visual problems. We will enhance the enhanced buffer.

   GreyChair

   1:03:23Okay.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:03:24And we'll specify the actual species, their spacing.

   1:03:29I know what to do. Yeah. We know what to do.

   1:03:35Yeah,

   Connected City

   1:03:35just uh

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:03:36make sure to do that.

   Connected City

   1:03:37Did you have did you have any comment on the location of the park um behind the applicant's property there?

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:03:45No, I'm not sure. I think that was just a comment, a fact. I

   1:03:52Heights laying out of the best location for a park wasn't directed by anybody.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:03:59Seems convenient.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:04:02It was on the record, I mean Christy can testify as well, her layout was not directed by anybody.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:04:10Right, so if you put the layout back up, the road that curves to the west that tees into the north-south road, um, we went through the in between the two wetlands. And so at the end of that road is where we put the neighborhood park. Um, in the conditions it says, you know, that the park could be moved. Again, this is a binding concept plan, so we would have to show that to staff if it was to be moved to a different place on the site. But

   1:04:40we thought you know teeing into that would be a nice look for the community.

   GreyChair

   1:04:53And I know there were some concerns from everybody, I think, about Water runoff and how that might affect their future wetland areas. Um maybe one of the engineers we have on the on the board here could explain how the county handles that. They they might not

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:05:11be familiar with

   1:05:11it.

   1:05:11I would tell you to me that is not a major concern. They will have to get permits from the water management district. and demonstrate that the runoff after development doesn't exceed the amount of runoff leaving the site before development for the design storm events and they'll have to do the same at the county level. So I don't really have too much of a concern about them causing flooding. Additional flooding.

   GreyChair

   1:05:38Correct. Yeah.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:05:42Okay.

   GreyChair

   1:05:43I just wanted to address that because I know it's concern and most of the people may or not know how we handle that.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   1:05:52And floodplains are accounted for as you can see on the concept plan and then there's separate floodplain compensation areas as well, so that aspect is looked at too.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:06:02And those are all things that are heavily scrutinized by the water management district when they go in to get permits. So I said I have not a whole lot of concern about that.

   GreyChair

   1:06:15Okay. David, anything else?

   1:06:21Okay, any other concerns or questions?

   Christopher Poole

   1:06:23The only other one Barbara that I had in my notes from the the public's comments is not that I agree with it, but the viability of the hotel. Did you have any or

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:06:32No, we we think it's a good location for a hotel.

   Christopher Poole

   1:06:35I would agree.

   GreyChair

   1:06:40Yeah, I mean They want to risk their money, that's up to them. Right? So

   1:06:50All right. If there are no further questions or comments, um do you have a motion?

   1:06:59Um sorry, we ca we you can only come up once. Did anybody like to hear extra comments? Typically only we give you one opportunity to come up and speak. And if do you have something else you can add to it? I

   1:07:15want

   1:07:15you you can't speak from back there first of all. Please come forward and I'll accept you as a

   1:07:20Okay, just wanted to give your name and address again.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:07:26We need to give you your name and

   GreyChair

   1:07:27address again.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:07:28Uh Mark Bud [address removed].

   GreyChair

   1:07:32Okay, that way they know who's speaking.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:07:35So um Just to give you an idea, I'm probably fifteen feet from you. That ceiling's probably fifteen feet. That's a setback. Double that, more than double that. Picture a wall. It's outside the back of my yard. Okay, now there would be potentially another 15 feet, so 30 feet by 35 feet, 10 feet between those buildings, all along

   1:08:06our perimeter. that doesn't really lend itself to uh a very good

   1:08:14view out the back of our yard plus the site right down in to my home.

   GreyChair

   1:08:21Well that's what we're talking about putting up the larger trees.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:08:24Yeah. And how long is that going to take for those trees to grow to heights?

   GreyChair

   1:08:28Well you know the problem is is if you don't own the property and you're not paying the taxes on it. I I understand it. I'm not

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:08:35against

   1:08:49uh probably one of a I think uh even with the setbacks, thirty seven hundred square foot ho home.

   GreyChair

   1:08:56Well there are plenty of examples all over the county and every other county where they have two story homes right next to one story homes and uh So we're trying to do our best to mitigate any impact that it has on the one-story homes, but it doesn't mean that we can just completely get rid of them.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:09:16Right. And the thing is, you know, today he has AR zoning. He could come in and apply for a subdivision today with one acre lots and they could build a wall somebody could build a wall or a two or three story house behind your home without having to come here to a public hearing.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:09:38Yeah, it could, but maybe not that density though. It's the combination of the density and the height. that becomes a problem.

   1:09:49It's both together. So a compromise would be to lower. And still get the the uh size home that you would desire.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:10:01So on Driver Lane I'm seeing north of the developers, two lots north of the developer's property or one of the developers' properties, I'm seeing some vacant lots.

   1:10:15You could say the same thing on the other side of the property. Well what if someone built a th two or three story home on one of those lots and then felt like the people that own this property then feel like their privacy's being invaded?

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:10:27Yeah, you could.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:10:30But I didn't buy an X2. Yeah, but to Mr. Gray's point, they they own that property and they paid the taxes on that property. And unfortunately they get to do with their property what they

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:10:45So all the all of us that are along the the uh with the homes that we have, which are high dollar homes We're gonna just be looking at nothing but big old blocks behind our house.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:10:59There would be nothing that stops him from building big old blocks today without coming to a public hearing like this.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:11:07Well that's why I'm here.

   1:11:12All right.

   GirardiVice Chair

   1:11:14Barbara, did you want to rebut any more?

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:11:20Um only if the Planning Commission has more questions. Thank you.

   GirardiVice Chair

   1:11:28All right.

   GreyChair

   1:11:29Any further discussion?

   GirardiVice Chair

   1:11:31You should take action on these separately.

   GreyChair

   1:11:33Okay. So we'll uh take action on P8 first. Okay, so uh there are motion.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   1:11:42Motion to approve.

   GreyChair

   1:11:43Second. We have a motion and a second with the modifications and everything. I think the modifications are probably on P9.

   1:11:53Okay. So any further discussion, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Okay. And P9, with the modifications that we talked about.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   1:12:07Motion approved.

   GreyChair

   1:12:10Motion is approved. Whoever second? Second that. Any further discussion of the motions? All in favor? Signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like signed. Okay. I should carry it.

2. 2Feb 3, 2026
   Board of County CommissionersP52Public hearingContinued

   An Ordinance Amending The Pasco County Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Regular) – CPA24(03) Elite 52 PD – Plan; Providing for Transmittal of a For A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the To The Future Land Use Map (Map 2-15 and 2- 15 And Sheet 12) from From AG (Agricultural) and And AG/R (Agricultural/Rural) to PD (Planned To PD(Planned Development) on On Approximately 156 Acres of Of Real Property Located North of Of State Road 52 Approximately .60 Mile East of the Of The Intersection of Of State Road 52 and US Highway 41; And a US41; And A Text Amendment Creating Subarea … Elite 52 PD; And a A Map Amendment To The … And An Effective Date.

   Approved minutes

   Approved to continue to the February 17, 2026 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey with Commissioner Starkey and Commissioner Yeager absent from the vote.

   Open this item →No recording
3. 3Feb 17, 2026
   Board of County CommissionersP54Public hearingApproved

   Approved minutes

   Approved Staff’s recommendation with Chairman Mariano and Commissioner Yeager absent from the vote.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 1:08:21
   ▶ 1:08:2123m

   Oakley

   1:08:21Thank

   1:08:21you.

   1:08:23Item P54 is PDE 260016. This is a comprehensive plan amendment in the name of CPA 2403 Elite 52 PD. It's providing for the transmittal of a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 and Sheet 12 from AG Agricultural and AGR Agricultural Rural to PD plan development on approximately 156 acres of real property located north of State. fifty two approximately point six mile east of the intersection of State Route fifty two and US Highway 41 and

   1:08:53a text amendment creating sub-area policy flu seven one eight one uh seven dot one dot one. Uh Elite 52 PD and a MAP amendment to the future land use map two-nine, adding sub-area map two-nine eighty-one, Elite 52 PD, and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency, providing for repeal reservability and effective date. This comes with a recommendation to authorize transmittal of the post-comprehensive plan amendment to the Department of Commerce, Florida Commerce, and other reviewing agencies. And there's a presentation of so desired.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:09:24Would anyone like to see a presentation? No, thank you. Any public comment?

   Madam Clerk

   1:09:29I have three signed up and one online.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:09:33Uh yes ma'am, who's in person.

   Madam Clerk

   1:09:36Caitlyn Buell.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:09:43Name address for the record, have you been sworn?

   Caitlin Buell

   1:09:46I

   1:09:46have

   1:09:46been sworn. My name is Caitlin Buell, B U E L L. My address is [address removed]. Okay. Um So I I'm a flight nurse and a private pilot. I live in pilot country with my husband who's also a pilot. I kept hearing in the Planning Commission meeting that the density was compatible. However, the neighborhoods surrounding this proposed development are one, five, and ten acre lots, while this development has lots which are 0.165

   1:10:17acres. It seems like there are some mental gymnastics required to call that compatible density. These lots are small enough that a two-story house built on it will be quite close to my property line and it will loom over the privacy barrier, making the barrier ineffective. I am totally good with having a couple neighbors back there, but that is not what this is. This would put five or six second story windows right at my property line. There will be nowhere to hide. This is going to obliterate any privacy I

   1:10:47have in my backyard or in my pool. The houses are planned to be too high and too close for me to be able to even regain my privacy with planting trees or building a wall. The concept plan uh happens to prove my point. The applicant owns the house in pilot country that backs up to the park area of this planned development. This guy knows it would suck to have five second story windows peering into his backyard, and he has protected his own property from it, while inflicting it on his neighbors. I

   1:11:17support his effort to maintain his own privacy, just as I hope you all will su Sorry, support his neighbors in achieving the same. I see two possible solutions here which I hope you will consider. One is to limit the houses bordering pilot country to a single story, or two, instead of having these lots packed in like sardines, make them half acre lots that would allow the houses to be set farther back from the property line to make the privacy barrier effective. In conclusion, the combination of the

   1:11:47height of the buildings and their density creates an overwhelming change to pilot country residents' privacy. If either the height or the density were changed, then I would support this plan. Thank you for hearing me out.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:11:59Thank you. Next.

   Caitlin Buell

   1:12:01Next up is

   Madam Clerk

   1:12:01crisp build.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   1:12:09Hello all Christopher Buell, [address removed]. Uh I haven't sworn. My wife and I, wife just spoke, were at the Planning Commission that predated this uh three or four weeks ago as well. A couple open topics for me that were coming from that. One of them was there was nothing that you know they were advertising that there was an enhanced privacy barrier between pilot country and the development. But there was nothing in there that actually defined what the

   1:12:40plants or trees that they were going to plant as part of the privacy barrier or what the actual fence was gonna be. Um so if it's just gonna be a white vinyl fence that's gonna blow over in the next storm or if it's gonna be some meaningful trees along with that. Um so that was would be something I thought was an open Item from the Planning Commission that I'd like to hear more about. The other one is a follow-up. It was the tree mitigation for all the clearing that was done on the northern part of the property

   1:13:11while it was agricultural. And it's my understanding that there's a five-year waiting period if it's going to go and get rezoned into housing. or unless there's a plan for the remitigation for the trees. And if there are, it would be great if that was put between us and uh the housing development to um reinforce the privacy barrier between the two. But those were open um issues from the previous meeting that I would like to to hear about. Again, like my wife said, you know,

   1:13:41we're not opposed to developing um behind us there they can do what they like with their land, but it would be um helpful uh to our property values as well as theirs if everything wasn't crammed in and there was something that defined what um the privacy barrier was gonna be. Third concern is just the um level of flooding that we get in our neighborhood and the water mitigation coming from that part of the property to the east. Previous owners

   1:14:12did a significant amount of landfill dumping on the southern part of that property in the last decade that's made the flooding significantly worse into our neighborhood because instead of all the water from that property flowing south towards 52 and getting cleared, it now all goes west into the southeast corner of our neighborhood. Which is flooding over the wetland section there, and there's nowhere else for it to go. Um so I know there's supposed to be um uh

   1:14:42Yeah, part of the Water Commission is gonna go out and do their planning purposes and stuff like that. I'm not sure that they are aware that there's berms up there that are larger than this room. Uh and previous dumping that's already lifted uh the grade for a lot of that property already, making the flooding a lot worse. But thanks for your consideration.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:15:04questions staff can answer on the tree. tree uh timeline there. Next.

   Madam Clerk

   1:15:11Next up is Mark Bodd.

   1:15:14So

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   1:15:18I've been sworn and uh my address Mark Budd. My address is [address removed]. And I was also here at the previous meeting. I have very similar concerns as the previous um speakers. Uh I also w talk about the inconsistency of the lot sizes from the Basco Trails community and our community and this right in the middle. Um I've always been uh concerned

   1:15:49about the zoning around the airport and I made those uh concerns safety concerns and incompatible land use concerns in previous uh meetings concerning the airport. Zoning around the airport. So I'm not going to reiterate those. Um It I've been there for Twenty five years. I have a nice view out the back. It's beautiful. I understand that uh You know, there's progress to be made. I'm

   1:16:19not against any of that. But uh the density that's there is pretty much five times what we have. And I can picture out the bit in my back yard now. I'm gonna be looking at potentially uh multi story, t at least two story with uh thirty five foot foot restriction. But if I get up close to my property line I'm gonna be looking forty five degrees up and nothing but walls with ten foot uh clearance

   1:16:49between 'em, which it's gonna really destroy all the property values along that western side of Pilot County. And so I'm not not in favor of that kind of uh density at all. And I agree with uh Caitlin. And her husband that if you're gonna you know the density either has to be reduced Or the the height of the houses have to be reduced to ensure that it's at least somewhat compatible with the s uh surrounding

   1:17:20communities and doesn't destroy our property values. Thank you. Thanks, sir. Anyone else?

   Madam Clerk

   1:17:28Yes, I have someone signed up online, Spencer Brass.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:17:32Mr. Brass?

   1:17:36Yes,

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:17:36Commissioner, can you

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:17:37hear me? We

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:17:38sure can.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:17:41Go ahead. I've got

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:17:43to spend [address removed]. And

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:17:46we're gonna

   1:17:50call

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:17:50about

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:17:50this

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:17:51project. it's been a

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:17:52long time

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:17:54and appreciate your support. Yes, I have been stormed.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:17:59Okay, thank you. Made a little delay there.

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:18:03And I'm available to answer any questions that that may come up.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:18:06Thank you, Ms. Ms. Wolheit.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:18:13Did you want to call for any more public comment? No

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:18:16one else

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:18:16has signed it. Just want to make sure keeping things in order. Barbara Wilhite, 6327 Grand Boulevard for the applicant. As Spencer Brass my client has said, we've worked on this for a while. When we originally brought this project forward, we came forward with 300 townhomes at a density of 5.5 units per developable acre. We did that with looking at the the development that had gone on and that had been improved on the west side of the airport, which was 40-foot lots

   1:18:47and apartments. So townhomes were were consistent. The other thing that has happened, so our density now, we've decreased it to 108 single-family detached homes. along our western border sixty foot lots and then the the balancer fifty foot lots. Our density is now two um point oh two units per acre. So And my client did that after meeting with the the homeowners and the residents. That's when he decided

   1:19:17to step back and and change the project to what you see today. To answer regarding the enhanced buffer, we brought forward from the beginning an enhanced buffer along that western boundary. When we came to Planning Commission, I mean heard the concerns of the neighbors. the um Planning Commission asked if we could go at it again and have an enhanced enhanced buffer. So we did. The question always comes up, what are you gonna plant? How close are they gonna be? And how tall at planting? So

   1:19:47we answered those questions. We we came up with a s uh southern red cedar. Those are the right-of-way. that planting will be twelve feet high. And they're unlike a tree who Like this and then goes up, right? Those are are wide to begin with and then they fill themselves in. So you have a pretty much a very a solid buffer. The code would require our trees to be 30 feet on center, and these will be 12 on center. Again, 12 feet at planting. We're

   1:20:18required to have a six foot high wall or fence and we will have an eight foot high wall or fence. We'll have our shrubs on the outside of the fence towards the neighbors, the eight-foot high fence, and then the the twelve feet high at planting southern red cedars.

   1:20:38Regarding the safety concerns and the zoning concerns rega around the airport y after a long time. You have an airport protection ordinance. And you you studied, you had pr hired professionals to go do noise studies and to guide you and your staff did a lot of work. um as to what's compatible with the airport. And you have an ordinance, we are following that ordinance, this these uses are compatible with your airport ordinance that you adopted. uh and we'll have to follow all the requirements of that ordinance.

   1:21:09I we did note again this is for the Comp Plan amendment, but we will be bringing back an MPUD. Um It's all ready 'cause it went to Planning Commission as the MPUD and the zone and the comp plan, but because you have a transmittal hearing you just have the comp plan before you. But we did note Christy uh Barrera's here from Height Design. And we On our plans it has thirty five feet as the maximum height. That is always confusing to me. You know, what is 35 feet? Is that two stories? Is that three stories? We can modify our plan coming

   1:21:39to the with the MPUD that comes to you at your next hearing after this is transmitted if you approve it to two stories so it's clear instead of a height. And then with regard to flooding, I took notes regarding that. Um Ms. Barrera is here from Height Design. She also is taking those notes. That is important to them as they design a project, that they understand those localized issues. The um the allegations regarding where the park area is located adjacent to the owner. I didn't even know that.

   1:22:10And and Christy didn't know that until it was raised at um at Planning Commission. Height design laid it out because that was the best location, centralized location for the park and also made a nice look as you come through the project and you come up to the park and then go right or left.

   1:22:29The tree. I w all the things you've heard from the neighbors regarding what somebody did the property is prior to our clients' ownership. whatever it is that regarding tree mitigation, whatever the rules are for what somebody did prior to my clients, uh our clients buying the property, that is is what it is. Um As far as what happens to that. Again, my clients didn't do any of the things that they alleged regarding W they d and they did say previous owner regarding landfill dumping, removal

   1:23:00of trees, all those things um were not done by my client, but Certainly they're they own the property so they're responsible for whatever the ordinance requires.

   1:23:10I think I hit it ch each of the items. Thank you.

   1:23:12Commissioner

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   1:23:12Starkey.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:23:13Can

   Starkey

   1:23:13you put up that picture? So I was gonna I was wondering what is that house that's jutting out into the property? So is that the owner's You see that see how those trees go into the bat into the other property? Is I'm guessing that must be the owner's house then. 'Cause I was trying to figure out what they meant and what Um

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:23:38Like I l I have no idea. I don't do not know where my clients live. Just

   Starkey

   1:23:42give me a thumbs up if that's the owner's house.

   Caitlin Buell

   1:23:44I yeah I can come point it out for you more specifically if you want.

   Starkey

   1:23:48Well I I've just seen that there is a house there that's in the into the property behind it. So interesting. But Uh okay, can you go back to to Barbara's map? Um

   1:24:02So uh I've been trying to see it on on here. I did listen to the Planning Commission meeting and they I think it was John Moody who showed that the trees were trees have been taken out. Um Are you saying your client bought the property after the trees were taken out?

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:24:21That's my understanding correct, yes. Spencer is online so he can answer.

   1:24:27If somebody'll bring him up and we want him to speak.

   Starkey

   1:24:29I can't get Pasco um the property appraiser site is not working today and I can't get Pasco Mapper to work either. Um but I did see those see where that was heavily wooded. And someone took it out. So we do have rules. And what what are the rules? If uh David Allen, do you know what they are?

   1:24:51About clear land clearing before you come in to change your zone?

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:24:55So it it would depend on whether I can answer that. Oh you can depend on whether they did it under a agricultural exemption or not, and whether they were properly zoned and did it for a five-year period or not.

   Starkey

   1:25:06Well that's what I'm asking. Did they?

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:25:07I have no idea. I don't

   Starkey

   1:25:09Well why why why would we not research that before? someone comes in for a rezoning.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:25:14Well we would when they come in for site plan approval.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:25:17Yes this is this is a transmitter. Okay so that's that's when that happens.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:25:22When you come in for site plan approval staff would look to see if they qualify for that exemption or not.

   Starkey

   1:25:27So why do we wait till site plan approval? Because then then someone could clear cut their property and then go through all this other stuff.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:25:35Because that's when we determine tree mitigation for all all tree mitigation is determined at site plan approval.

   Starkey

   1:25:42Okay, I think

   1:25:45Then then people

   MarianoChair

   1:25:46are

   Starkey

   1:25:46just

   MarianoChair

   1:25:46gonna cut away. It's not when it occurs. That's when we address it. So they'll look back.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:25:53Yes, they'll look back if if But

   MarianoChair

   1:25:55we don't do tree mitigation at the comp plan stage.

   Starkey

   1:25:58But but I but you uh how do I say

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:26:02at site plan if if they improperly took down those trees if they don't qualify for the exemption They'll have to mitigate for that tree removal.

   Starkey

   1:26:10But when does the clock start ticking? At s at at that moment or or when they started applying for the change?

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:26:18The the clock was already t Th the the clock was ticking on the exemption when they started the removal.

   1:26:28But if you're asking when do we when do we start the look back, it's when they come in for site plan approval.

   Starkey

   1:26:33Okay, but you'll look let's see okay, so can you can you go back a few ye go back a few

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:26:38years? With all due respect, this this doesn't have to do with what we're voting on today. This is the we can't condition that we can find this out. This does not that subject is not a good thing.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:26:49So Barbara's saying whatever our rules are, shoot-they'll follow. She's admitting that if they have to mitigate for their removal, they'll have to mitigate for their removal. She's publicly stated that.

   Starkey

   1:26:58That's correct. All right, so then the next thing, um, and I if you could go back to can you get rid of that box and I I can deal with it like this. Um so we have the small lots on the left.

   1:27:14Which they're not backing up to anyone. although that's not one of our better neighborhoods, I would take that back all day long. Um Uh I'm I am a little concerned of putting sixties up to one acre lot behind one acres. I don't I um I'm not so concerned about the screening because that's the responsibility of both sides. I mean You don't own your view. You don't own

   1:27:45your view. So but Is it compatible to put a sixty next to I don't know how I don't know how big those lots are.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:27:55On the west side you have apartments up against up against their west side. Approved apartments.

   Starkey

   1:28:06Well I'm just talking about this this row of houses next to that row of houses. And and then I look over here and they're big lots over here. I I am getting concerned that you you Until someone shows me the other way people are gonna go east and west, north of State Road 52, should we really be increasing? uh putting a lot of density along the northern side of fifty two. We're gonna have a backlog kinda like what we have on fifty four what's gonna happen on fifty four, so I'm I'm

   1:28:36wondering if we could not Change out some of those sixties for seventies? Um well

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:28:43we can look at it, Commissioner. This is a transmittal hearing on the comp plan. And they're and the size lots are not in the comp of comp in the comp plan, it's just a number. Looking to my looking to your long range salvage.

   Starkey

   1:28:54Maybe the number is needs to be reduced just a little bit for my

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:28:58Well it's a maximum and ultimately if your MPUD, if you transmit the Comp Plan amendment with the numbers that are in it. And then you decide. At the MPD stage it needs to be something different, you can do that still.

   Starkey

   1:29:09But we can also transfer it with a less lesser.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:29:12We we'd be just guessing. Which really isn't fair to the applicant. And you're not you're not. out because you can address this at M P U D. It's perfectly fine to have one number in a comp plan and have less in the zoning. It does happen that way.

   MarianoChair

   1:29:28So if Commissioner Starkey And you can and they can reduce the number in the final adoption of the complaint.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:29:34That's true. Very true, very true.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:29:37Transmitting it as it is today and then you try and negotiate down the line or what what would you like to do since there's three of us?

   Starkey

   1:29:43Um, well I want to hear what how you guys feel. I'm the only one that's said how I feel, so I don't know what

   Oakley

   1:29:50Go show open. Well I d I don't have any problem with the the development that they're proposing uh I think I've already heard that they didn't remove the trees. It could have been done prior on or before then. Not their fault at all. Um I think if there's a buffer here we do need to make sure a buffer is is good for the folks there at Pilot Country and where this where this lies and I think I believe that Spencer will take care of doing

   1:30:20the right thing there, so I think it's a good project.

   Starkey

   1:30:25So so on those buffers, I think it's also the responsibility of the pilot compa coun uh country residents if They don't own the view from their backyard. If they don't want to see the house, they can also plant trees. So I we always put it on the new develop new person, but I have a little mixed feelings on that, but Um and frankly.

   Oakley

   1:30:48I think that'll work out in the

   Starkey

   1:30:51process

   Oakley

   1:30:51of developing it.

   Starkey

   1:30:53And um Barbara, you're saying you're gonna restrict them to two story houses?

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:30:57We can add that to the M P U D 'cause right now it's thirty five feet, which probably could fit three.

   Starkey

   1:31:01Yeah. That's wrong. I I I don't I don't see a need for a restriction. But I just think the law should be bigger than some. But that's that happens somewhere else, right? Yeah. That happens

   MarianoChair

   1:31:15when

   Starkey

   1:31:15it

   MarianoChair

   1:31:15comes

   Starkey

   1:31:15back from college.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:31:19All right, any any further questions? We have a motion to transmit this item up to Tallahassee for review. I move.

   Starkey

   1:31:30Second.

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:31:30Second. Roll call,

   MarianoChair

   1:31:32I guess. Do we have to do is Lisa on?

   1:31:36No, it's not. This is not an ordinance adoption even though it's on that section of your but she's not

   Starkey

   1:31:41online. Sorry. So all favor?

   WeightmanVice Chair

   1:31:43Aye. Aye. Thank you. All right, thank you. B fifty five.

4. 4Apr 7, 2026
   GeneralP45Public hearingAdopted

   An Ordinance Amending The Pasco County Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Regular) – CPA24(03) Elite 52 PD – Plan; Providing for Transmittal of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment … And An Effective Date.

   Approved minutes

   Approved to adopt by roll call vote with Commissioner Weightman absent from the vote.

   Open this item →No recording