Skip to main content
Pasco Countymeeting record

PDE-26-0017

Published agenda

2 appearances between Oct 2, 2025 and Oct 7, 2025, at 2 boards.

OutcomeAdopted by the Board of County Commissioners on Oct 7, 2025
Approved to adopt by a roll call vote.

Official title

An Ordinance Amending The Pasco County Comprehensive Plan; Providing For A Comprehensive Plan Amendment To The Future Land Use Map (Map 2- 15 And Sheet 14) From AG (Agricultural) To EC (Employment Center) On Approximately 47.58 Acres Of Real Property Located On The West Side Of McKendree Road Approximately 3,560 Feet South Of The Intersection Of Tyndall Road And McKendree Road; And Providing For Additional Text Amendments As Necessary For Internal Consistency; Providing For A Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date.

On a calendar

Oct 2, 2025 → Oct 7, 2025 · click a mark to jump to that appearance

Every appearance2 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. 91% of 76 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

  1. 1
    Planning CommissionPC5Public hearingNo disposition in the minutes

    An Ordinance Amending The Pasco County Comprehensive Plan; Plan Amendment (Consent) – CPAS25(04) Double Branch – Providing For A for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment To The to the Future Land Use Map (Map 2- 15 And Maps (2-15 and Sheet 14) From Changing from AG (Agricultural) To to EC (Employment Center) On on Approximately 47.58 Acres Of of Real Property Located On The on the West Side Of of McKendree Road Approximately 3,560 Feet South Of The Intersection Of of Tyndall Road And and McKendree Road; And Providing For Additional Text Amendments As Necessary For Internal Consistency; Providing For A Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date. Road Intersection.

    Open this item →
    12m
    Moody

    The first item that we have on the consent agenda is item PC5, and you'll be sitting as a local planning agency for this one. This one also has a companion rezoning item PC6. Item PC five is PDE 26-0311, a comprehensive plan amendment CPAS 2509 in the name of Double Branch.

    Amending map. 2-15 and Sheet 14 changing AG Agricultural to EC Employment Center on approximately forty nine point five eight acres of real property located at the west side of McKendry Road, approximately three thousand five hundred and sixty feet south of Tyndall Road and McKendry Road intersection. On this one we now have individuals signed up for comment as well as for item PC six. PDE asks that we pull this item.

    GreyChair

    You pull PC five.

    Moody

    Yes, sir.

    GreyChair

    All right. So that was a good one.

    Moody

    P C five and PC six are companion items. P C six is the companion M Pud.

    GreyChair

    Okay. So the applicant's present? Yeah, okay. Anybody here to object on that just for my future knowledge? Okay. Thank you. All right. Um

    So those are going to the regular items. So um PC seven I guess we're on to? Well Mr.

    GirardiVice Chair

    Chairman PC seven is also a regular item, so you could take up PC five and PC. Okay. You could just go to your regular agenda. Okay.

    GreyChair

    Okay, thank you.

    Moody

    Uh the individual that we have signed up to speak does not wish to object, they just wish to make comments. Would you still like the presentations and these items be polled for PC five and PC six?

    GreyChair

    If yes.

    Moody

    Okay.

    GreyChair

    Yeah.

    Brian Junker

    Good afternoon. Brian Junker with Planning Development Economic Growth Department.

    Hmm. Oh less.

    There we go. Okay, good afternoon to you. Today I'm presenting PDE twenty six zero zero one seven, C Pass twenty-five zero four double branch. The proposal today is a comprehensive plan amending the flu from AG Agricultural to EC Employment Center. The purpose of the project is to increase the employment generating land within the area and align 37.14 acres of the proposed flu with the existing double-branch MPUD

    zoning district.

    Joel

    Mm-mm.

    Brian Junker

    The project is located on the west side of McKindy Road, approximately 3,560 feet south of the intersection of Tyndall Road and McKindry Road. There is an accompanying rezoning petition number 7881, Double Branch MPUD substantial modification.

    The project is located on the South Market area within the urban service area.

    Here is a context map. To show where the property is located, the property is with a subject site in red.

    Here is the aerial view of the subject site.

    Here is the map of the transportation network map showing the roads around the proposed project.

    Here is the existing future land use, currently AG, Agricultural. And the proposed Fisher Land Use is Easy Employment Center.

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

    And today, the spread comes to you with a recommendation we recommend the local planning agency to find the proposed amendment consistent with a comprehensive plan. I'm here if you have any question for me.

    GirardiVice Chair

    All right, thank you. Any questions? I do have one question. Yeah. I have no objection to the Plan Amendment, but I I guess it's relates to your In your planning discussion, you have some comments about trails and transit. And the way those are worded it Sort of makes it look like there really aren't many trails and that there are no no transit. But then the companion zoning has a plan

    attached to it that shows transit stops and shows trails. Is there a reason you're not recognizing what the zoning requires them to do?

    Brian Junker

    Well regarding the uh transit stops, um the closest one I think was to the south, not too close to the project. That's why we're not showing it. um on the project. The trails, yes, is gonna be discussed further on the MPUD, but there is a recreational trail that is provided along the northern border of the wetland connecting with the double branch parkway.

    GirardiVice Chair

    I get that you're saying what ex existing but this is a planning discussion about these facilities. I just would think that you would recognize the fac the trails and transit stops that the applicant is actually committing to provide through the M P D approval. I it just to me it seems misleading to say no bus stops. when the applicant is committing to provide bus stops.

    Brian Junker

    Understood.

    GirardiVice Chair

    Shouldn't you at least recognize that as my question.

    Brian Junker

    Agreed. Yes. And if the board wish we can uh make the amendment for Um the next one. Okay. Hearing.

    GreyChair

    So is there anything you want to r amend besides the bus stops, Damon?

    GirardiVice Chair

    Well uh

    I guess my my concern is the planning stuff went Mr. Vermillion. Spent a lot of time negotiating a plan with the applicant that provides for trails and the parks department. Did a significant amount of e signi significant amount of effort negotiating a plan that provides for trails and transit. I just think that should be recognized somewhere in the agenda memo.

    GreyChair

    Yeah.

    Amy Heiler

    Uh Amy Toll, Planning and Development, we can make that adjustment. The s the agenda memo is just currently identifying the facts on the ground, but we can also add the future uh obligations at the developer to align with what's in the MPUD.

    GreyChair

    Come on.

    Right. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Yeah. All right.

    Unidentified speakerVoice A

    Thank you.

    Move to recommend of approval of item

    GirardiVice Chair

    PC five.

    We you need to see if there's public comment and uh let the applicant make her presentation first.

    Barbara Wilhite

    I don't know about the presentation part. Barbara Wilhite, 8627, Grand Boulevard, New Port Richey I joined for the applicant, I joined this wonderful team because Joel doesn't like us anymore. And so here I am, um the face of the land use attorney for this wonderful project. So we're not gonna make a presentation, staff has made the presentation. The team, the wonderful team here, is available for questions. Um we'd like to

    GreyChair

    Okay. So listen to the com is there s some is other than just one person?

    Moody

    There's only one individual signed

    GreyChair

    up. Okay. Would you like to come forward, state your name? And your address and then feel free to comment. Sure. So we can get it on the record, please. Thank you.

    Unidentified speakerVoice B

    I'm Dr. Judy Horboth. I have the property at [address removed], which is adjacent to the Miller's property. And I spoke to um a couple of these wonderful individuals here and then also previously on the phone And I don't object to the process and to the variance and to the zoning that they're requesting. What I'm like concern is, since we have an equine sanctuary on the property that's adjacent, that we have an adequate barrier or trails. I heard the term trails coming

    up, something where um we don't have an impact to the ag portion that we currently have, which Is why we bought this property 15 plus years ago. So that's my concern to make sure that those planning directions, directives have been brought into play for an adequate buffer for AG, where we have horses which need peace and quiet, and we have community and individuals coming with special needs that come to see horses to feel better as a therapeutic type of process. So my My

    concern is just to emphasize that we want to ensure that those buffers are in place and they're part of the planning process when they're moving forward with the project.

    GreyChair

    Okay. Thank you. Any questions from anybody? Okay.

    Unidentified speakerVoice A

    Now I'll move to recommend approval of item two.

    Connected City

    Two five. Barbara's uh respond to that.

    GreyChair

    Barbara,

    GirardiVice Chair

    do you want to respond to that please?

    Connected City

    Did you watch it? Yeah.

    GirardiVice Chair

    Or style of anybody that wants to respond. Go ahead. You are you still legal?

    Joel

    Definitely not not legal. Not practicing the law, a mere development consultant. Um Joel II, Palm Harbor, Florida, Business Consultant for the Applicant. I'll reiterate what I heard Mr. Wolf tell the neighbor, so I'm speaking for him. As he explained, we were obligated from the beginning when we did the original development agreement with the county, the county actually required us to process this EC land use

    amendment for this additional land. So we're we're complying with an original obligation that we promised the county for the employment center. That's number one. Number two is based upon the current planning and engineering, Mr. Wolf explained that it is like a ninety-eight percent probability. that that southernmost parcel adjacent to the neighbor will actually be a large stormwater drainage area and won't have a use at all. And as he explained, if something happens through the engineering

    that that changes Because there's also very either no access without going through a wetland or difficult access. that if for some reason that plan changes, then through the site plan process they of course will reach out and engage with her and work out appropriate buffering uh for the use, but the odds are very minimal that that southernmost part will be anything other than master stormwater drainage to handle the part north of

    that that is more developable. So that's that's the factual situation thinking.

    GreyChair

    Thank you, Mr. Two. Any questions?

    Unidentified speakerVoice A

    Now, given that we don't consider buffers in a comprehensive plan amendment, it might be more appropriate a rezoning, I'll still recommend them and rec make a motion to recommend approval of item PC five. I'll second.

    GreyChair

    We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like signed. Okay, Mr. Garris.

  2. 2
    Board of County CommissionersP48Public hearingAdopted
    Approved minutes

    Approved to adopt by a roll call vote.

    Open this item →
    1m
    Madam Clerk

    Cripple publication, P48, Tampa Bay Times, August 20, 2025, and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

    Oakley

    Item P48 is PDE 260017. This is an ordinance amending the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan, providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map, Map 2 15, and Sheet 14 from AG Agricultural to EC Employment Center on approximately 47.58 acres of real property located on the west side of McKendrie Road, approximately 3,560. 60 feet south of the intersection of Tyndall Road and McKendrie Road, and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for

    internal consistency, providing for repeal or severability and an effective date. This comes to you with a recommendation from the Planning Development and Economic Growth Department as well as the local planning agency to adopt the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and ordinance by roll-call vote. There is a presentation if so desired.

    StarkeyChair

    Board members, would you like the presentation? No, thank you.

    MarianoVice Chair

    I like what I see.

    StarkeyChair

    Okay. Um then is there anyone here in the public to speak to this item?

    Move approval. Uh is who's he signed up for? P fifty. Okay. Second. I think it's uh another Rol Calva.

    Madam Clerk

    District One, Commissioner Oakley. Aye. District two, Commissioner Weightman. District four, Commissioner Yeager. Aye. District five, Commissioner Mariano.

    StarkeyChair

    Aye.

    Madam Clerk

    District three, Chairman Starkey.