Zoning Amendment (Regular) – Plazewski MPUD Master Planned Unit Development, Villages of Pasadena Hills – Walter T. Plazewski – A Rezoning Request from an A-R Agricultural-Residential Zoning District and an AR-5 Agricultural-Residential Zoning District to an MPUD Master Planned Unit Development District to Allow the Development of a Maximum of 200 Single- family Detached/Attached Dwelling Units and Associated Infrastructure on Approximately 40 Acres

39:02Good afternoon again, Tammy Snyder, Planning and Development.

39:08And here we have Paseski M PUD, PDD 227564.

39:15And there's a location map. Uh Tyndall Road is directly butting it to the north.

39:22Pull your mic up a little bit. Yeah,

39:24you're kinda quiet. There we go. All right, proposed as a rezoning request from an AR Agricultural Zoning District and AR5 Agricultural Residential Zoning District to an MPUD master plan unit development district to allow the potential development of a maximum of 200 single-family detached and attached dwelling units and associated infrastructure on approximately 40 acres. And here is their master plan. They're showing their main access to the north on Tyndall.

39:54Proposed uh interconnects to the uh east.

40:00There's a future land use.

40:04Do we have some Village F concept plans. We have the uh original VOPH proposal. Um the Evans F one was one of the first ones in Village F to come in. Um then we have the Plazeski master plan just to kind of see how things can kind of change around in the villages. Presently the subject site contains a residence, some outbuildings, and pasture land, and the project lies within village F of the villages of Pasadena Hills. Conditions

40:35were also added to address a mix of lot sizes, front yard trees, architectural details, and the maximum number and placement of attached products. Uh the proposed request is consistent with the Pasco County LDC and the applicable provisions of the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan. And I would like to note you you all did receive an additional packet on this one. Um Condition of approval number uh forty was revised for clarity. Initially it said any

41:06lots located immediately adjacent to the rural enclave buffer boundary line shall be a minimum of 60 feet wide. But the applicant wanted a little bit more flexibility. So we also included this requirement shall not apply if a neighborhood park site or a north-south street right-of-way is immediately adjacent to such perimeter boundary location. If a park site or right-of-way are to be proposed, then the developer shall also install a type B landscape buffer, which may be located within the easterly 15 feet of the rural enclave buffer.

41:37adjacent to the right of way or park. If located adjacent to the Rural Enclave buffer, the minimum neighborhood park dimensions shall be the length of the Rural Enclave buffer by thirty feet wide, and neither the park nor the right of way shall include or encroach into any port portion of the rural enclave buffer. We also added approval of condition number 43 to address on-street parking and any issues that may arise with that if they do propose on-street parking. The

42:07HOA or CDD required to be established under this MPUD shall include provisions for the management of all-street parking and obstruction of roadways, including without limitation covenants, conditions, and restrictions which require the HOA or CDD as applicable to be the primary enforcement entity for all current or future LDC or code. of ordinance provisions related to on street parking and obstruction of roadways, and which require the HOA or C D D as applicable, to adopt and enforce specific regulations which

42:38empower the HOA or C D D Board as applicable, to adopt, enforce, and otherwise regulate on street parking and obstruction of roadways within the subdivision, Which regulations may be more restrictive than applicable LDC or code of ordinance provisions. Such regulations shall specifically include the authority for the HOA or CDD to tow vehicles that violate such regulations. Such HOA or CDD enforcement shall include, at a minimum, any obstruction of any roadway in the subdivision that causes interference with the

43:08efficient delivery of emergency or law enforcement. services and or vehicles at any time, whether or not emergency services have been requested. This condition and the applicable HOA or CDD regulations do not preclude the county from also enforcing applicable LDC or code of ordinance provisions relating to on-street parking or obstruction of roadways.

43:31And with that, the PDD recommends approval with conditions.

43:37Um

43:39Do we does the applicant want to speak?

43:48Madam Chair, Joel to twin associates. I have the privilege of representing Walter and Ruth Plazuwski. They are the property owners and the applicants, along with Hike Design and Linkson Associates. We had requested additional time, but we're going to reserve most of that, if we may, until we see what public comments andor questions we have from the commission. I'm just going to briefly say that this was recommended for approval by

44:19the VOPH policy and planning committee as being consistent with the more than a dozen VOPH MPDs which have previously been approved. Mm. However, based upon public input and also questions we received, we voluntarily have modified and we believe improved conditions since the policy and planning committee meeting in concert with staff. We are in 100% agreement with the conditions that have been added and revised since the VOPH

44:49committee hearing. And those include, just to make sure the record's clear for everyone who's here who may be participating. We have added since the VOPH hearing the board's most recent MPUD conditions for architectural design requirements for single-family detached lots. You recently required those to be included in, I think it was the Clark MPUD, was not my matter, but my understanding is the policy moving forward is going to be to

45:19include those. So even though that was Subsequent to our VOPH hearing, we have included those. We've also included your board's new conditions regarding the street trees and the landscaping requirements that you're now imposing in all MPDs. We added the proposed condition that we just worked out the last couple of days that Ms. Snyder read into the record about an attempt to be able to have better enforcement and control over on-street parking. Um, we can't solve the problem

45:49countywide without you reviewing and going through the LDC process. However, with MPDs moving forward. You certainly are empowered as an MPUD condition to start the process of trying to get some control over that. We voluntarily agree to add that condition. And we also agreed to uh this clarification on the Roll Enclave buffer. Just by by way of explanation, the applicant really wasn't looking for more flexibility. They just wanted clarification. And the point there

46:19was. We had agreed before that immediately adjacent to that adjacent property in that southwest corner, we had to have a minimum of 60-foot lots adjacent to them for compatibility compatibility. Our point was that if we locate the neighborhood park there, Or if we put a roadway there, then technically the lots won't be adjacent to that. So we want the option of locating the neighborhood park there, which

46:49would give those people even a greater buffer because they would have the 50-foot rural enclave buffer plus the park buffer, and then lots all the way on the other side. So that was just a clarification to make it clear, depending on which option. Because Mr. Miz Plazewski, as I think we've explained to all the commissioners individually, They do not have a buyer, they do not have a developer, they do not have a builder. So we're trying to do this in a reasonable fashion to help them as landowners to be able to position that

47:20property for future sale and development. And then finally, and this is probably the most important, is coming out of the VOPH hearing, even though VOPH did not recommend it. In concert with staff, we have agreed now on a mandatory mix of lot sizes so that you will not see just all 40s or all 50s. There's a mandatory mix of lots that requires a certain percentage of larger lots, number one. And secondly, as I said, specifically requires 60-foot

47:50lots. adjacent to the rural enclave buffer area. So with that said, we're in 100% agreement on the conditions if you see fit to approve it on that basis. We obviously urge you on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Plazewski to do so. It's very important to them, obviously, as landowners out there. It's their legacy. And uh we ask for your support. We will reserve the rest of our time in case there's anything we need to address after any public comment, or certainly if any of you have any

48:20questions. Thank you.

48:22Um board members, I have some questions, but I'll see if you have any first. Okay, uh so you and I spoke and um if if they could put up the map. of the um development. Um and I want to talk about the roads, please. Why isn't it up there?

48:51And I I'd like to go in yeah. To the one that shows. the potential connections around it. So Commissioner Moore. As you've experienced the challenges of Wesley Chapel Boulevard, while it has not been widened, one of the characteristics of that area and many in the county is that the only way you can get in and out is on Wesley Chapel Boulevard. If we had had those

49:21neighborhoods connect. there could have been alternate ways to move around.

49:26Right.

49:26And th and this is this is, you know, I guess in planning, I think it's a grid grid system or And that's why I always preach that connectivity is so important. And I do not think that we should be having developments that Um Picture that whole road, picture picture everything there and that and every neighborhood could only get in and out on one road. So um and I I appreciate that the the neighborhood to the left. didn't want anyone on their public roads. But those are

49:56public roads and I believe that a grid system is important. And so I believe that we should be having requiring them to make a connection. To the left. Um and then one day If the development comes in to the right, they need to connect to the right. So um I I would like to make that change to this plan. That's number one. Um what was the other thing I wanted to do? Oh, uh as we

50:26talk about on-street parking. And I don't think we're asking them for any, we're giving the neighborhood the ability to control, have more control on their parking. But as Commissioner Oakley as you said, 40-foot lot has its challenges. But I sure don't want to see people pulling up onto the yards. uh and and turning the yards into dirt pits. That's not a Premier County. Uh In Longleaf, where we have narrow roads, but we have on-street

50:57parking, there's requirements that everyone you can have on-street parking, but everyone has to be on the same side.

51:03Yeah.

51:04No matter which side you live on. So I would like to see if we can say no parking on your on the yards. And uh Parking would need to be on one side of the street. If they choose to have on street parking.

51:19I've addressed the parking issue because I'm right now I'm temporarily in a in a project that has fitch foot lots and there's been parking issues in the road and all. I've also presented those to Mr. Two and them and they've pretty much agreed to have better controls on that parking throughout the development. And it's it's just very important that that they pay attention to that. So And and they've been voluntarily willing to do that. So

51:50Well uh what do you think of the restrictions that that the residents cannot use the front yard as a parking lot?

51:58Isn't that in our code already?

51:59No, it is not. Then that's

52:01a problem. Well that would be other they would have in their HOA covenants. HOA covenants would take care of that.

52:08Good. It doesn't have an HOA. Is there an HOA in this development or will be in the development?

52:13It'll be required as an MPUD. We're required, you know, because someone has to own and control the common areas. And that was one reason for for the suggestion that I made, which Mr. Goldstein and and and the County Attorney's Office and Steph and I discussed. The thought process here is in our view, I think this board ultimately can only address these issues with an across the board land development code update. But in the meantime, the thought was, as we committed to you, Commissioner Oakley, in the individual meeting, the

52:44thought was, at a minimum, in new MPUDs, you have control of that and can control it by condition. So what we're trying to do in this Condition is to empower and require that HOA. Uh, to in fact address the issue. And as Commissioner Moore said, they really, it's their community. They know the type of community they want, but they need to be empowered to enforce that privately because it'll be quicker, it'll be less costly than your code

53:14enforcement process for you having to try it through code enforcement to enforce that. You can always do that. Mm. as a backup, but the thought was let's empower and and give something of a mandate. to these associations to adopt these regulations, not only to enforce whatever code you adopt, but to even go further if they see fit in their community with local control. So, I mean, certainly we would never advocate that people should be parking in the

53:44front yard. But However however you control that. I think you already have a thing. We

53:50don't we don't control that. That's

53:52then you can you can clearly require HOAs to address that issue in their documents.

53:56We can we can do that. That I think that's a good idea. I assume that people wouldn't just be parking in their well in their lots, but you haven't faced that issue. You've

54:05just come into my neighborhood where we had an HOA, but we no longer have an

54:10HOA.

54:10It's now a voluntary HOA.

54:12Yeah. So you know when I first looked at this project and saw it just at a Hold it, but project with homes, forty foot lots, whatever. And so it on its own and not in the village. It totally looked different. So when you put it in the village concept of V OPH, which I agree with. It it turns out better, but it even is better if we make these considerations for parking and things this nature. I've noticed. Where I live now.

54:43I wouldn't even notice this or realize that parking was the issue if I hadn't been living where I'm at right now. So in a turn it kind of helps me look at it for vision in the future. I want this to be a better community, just as y'all do. And I think the people who live around it want to be a nice community. So by having some of these things with HOAs that they can protect their community.

55:04Yeah.

55:07Single detached and attached dwellings. Um, when you say attached, you're thinking more of villas, duplex, something like that, correct?

55:14Yeah, yes, sir. This obviously doesn't contemplate any multifamily product. It will be some fee simple attached product and and your additional uh controls on that, I believe actually strict the number of units to those buildings to no more than six. So that is part of the last changes you made and we've incorporated those. So you will not be looking at large massing of buildings. In any event, the villas attached products will be that way. So I think it'll be what you'll view as a desirable product in VOPH. And

55:44yet gives us density because, as we discussed, the VOPH plan is very different than the rest of the county. There are four or five large set-aside areas for rural enclaves and core reserve and countryside and village separators. And the only way you can set aside 30%. Of the landmass over 20,000 acres is if you then cluster and concentrate density. in the villages to create this village look that then has separation

56:14between others. And the other thing is of course our VOPH financial plan is 100% dependent. upon that cluster density. And if we start backing down from the cluster density, the financial plan disintegrates because there aren't enough units to pay for those roads and utilities. So this is like a domino effect. Um and I understand the concern with the small lots. Our thought is it has to do with quality, aesthetics, and design, that the issues I am hearing

56:45from you are the appearance, the quality of the appearance in the community, the variety in design, variety in color, streets, landscaping, and aesthetic issues like parking. So I urge you not to throw the baby out with a bathwater. I think the underlying planning concept is solid. there and everything we put in place there depends right frankly on those planning concepts. We just need to enforce them. And I think these added four or five conditions that you have now are a very good

57:15first step. We put those out there. We make it clear to the builders, you've got to step up your game, particularly in this location. And we look at what product comes on board the first year or two. And, you know, this is a long 50-year plan. And if you're not happy with the quality of that product. Come back and whack them again. So I mean I think the the industry is getting the message that you're sending. I think it's being heard loud and clear, and we're trying to help you get that message out there. I think it's a quality

57:45message. And if I may, I know I don't want to ignore your other question, the cross access, because I promised you. that I would respond to that. Uh the property owners Absolutely are willing to do whatever this board thinks is appropriate. So from the planning standpoint. High design and I certainly understand that the basic premise of county planning is thou shalt have cross connections where feasible. The entire VOPH master roadway plan is dependent on a series of two-lane

58:15roads for the most part that rely on interconnectivity for people to have many ways to come in and out. That's the way it works. Um Mr. and Mrs. Plazuki ironically actually paid for that access easement to the West. at some point so that they would have that access if required. That connection is to a public roadway. And We agreed coming out of the VOPH committee hearing, the

58:45path of least resistance. There were objections to that. And so the question was: if it took it to get approval, will you restrict that connection to emergency or secondary? And we said, What we always say, yes, we're going to do whatever the board wants. We're willing to restrict it. We're willing to have it open. We also promised you in individual meetings that we would provide an internal stub out to the property to the east just in case it does get developed. So we would have that. So we're with you. We understand it. We just don't want

59:15to pick fights. We don't have to pick. I

59:17told you I would take it up.

59:19But we will we will support you. We will support you 100% and comply if the board's direction. is to have that public cross access. So we'll go either way. Commissioner Fitzpatrick

59:30has

59:30a question.

59:31I agree with the mixed sizes. I appreciate that. And I don't want to misinterpret or mis quote, but Commissioner Oakley, I remember at one point you and discussed smart growth and you said smart growth, we have to build communities. Well, I'm gonna touch base on a community. To me, a community is when my kids can go out and play in the yard and they can play in the neighborhood, they can go to the back of the neighborhood, they can go to the front of the neighborhood, and I know that there's no back exit. And

1:00:02there's no interconnectivity to somewhere where they can escape. So I Agree with the fact where it does stay an emergency exit only and to stay an emergency access only. Because once you open that up, there's no more community. It's nowhere. Okay, well, I know every neighbor in the back of the neighborhood, and I can pick up a phone. Hey, did you see this kid? Or the neighbor says, Oh, this kid's running around, or okay, it's time to send.

1:00:34Well, there there's no more community once you interconnect every single neighborhood together. So I think we do need to keep our communities But we need to keep them close. So we have to be careful with our Oh,

1:00:47I I I appreciate what you're saying when you have young kids, um, but and we're I don't think we're talking about a lot of traffic, but what happens when you When when you you cannot talk from the from out there, so thank you. Um What happens when you have all the neighborhoods jump onto one street? It becomes a traffic nightmare. And when your kids get older, And they want to go visit a friend. in the neighboring community 'cause they all go to the same school, they're gonna go have to go out on that busy road to get to

1:01:17their next door neighbor that lives three houses down. So um It's it's it's look at Tampa, Saint Pete, all over the place. New Port Richey. It's a great community. All the streets are connected and there's a grid. Commissioner Mariano.

1:01:33Thank you. What concerns me here is we talk about on street parking as an issue. If you've got a forty foot lot And you're gonna have the parking on one side of the street. And your driveway's twenty foot wide. How many cars are you gonna be able to park in front of your house?

1:01:50At most. So you got one for one side, one for the other side. And I will tell you, Commissioner Oak Embassy, Regency Park. You will see lawns torn up from people with vehicles, some commercial, some residential. and just tearing up the road. A lot of them put extra concrete on there. And it's a disaster.

1:02:09Super tight lots, forties and fifties. And I'm gonna tell ya just driving through that how intense it is right now before it's even full. they're gonna have some issues down the road. Uh I will tell you when I look at the density. You know, the village center and the red square Should be really strong and intense. So if there's weaknesses as far as how much density is because of different changes. Let's go put the intense intensity right in that area or closer to the circle. This is on the outer cusp. So for the people in li live in these houses that are Much

1:02:40larger lots. Forty foot lots beside him? Even sixty foot's a lot to shrink down immediately. But at least it's better than. I think if we go to the forty foot lot, you're gonna just create problems down the road. Even even with your conditions try to put in. If you don't have the land, you don't have the land. At least ten foot you get a better chance with fifties and sixties. I think going to all the forties that are in here, I don't think it it it fits. Um So I'll s I'll stick

1:03:10with that comment for now and then we'll talk transportation after.

1:03:12So I let me add something. Okay. Uh since I've been lemonary with pitchfoot lots. Uh, through the holidays. Is the traffic and the parking all has been terrible. Since the holidays are over and we're a week or two after that, everybody there must have had friends or family or something come in. because the roads have cleared up quite a bit. The only issue I see with parking now, and most people are parked in their driveway. Or

1:03:42the garage. is the fact that I have a commercial vehicle or two that are in the area that's already finished building. They're still building out in that area. But there's a couple of commercial vehicles parked in the road. that I wish were not there. But I don't see it like I saw during the holidays. That's kinda cleared up its on its own. But I think the issue with With a f with the effect of HOA is taking care of some of these parking issues and things. these

1:04:13commercial vehicles pregnant in Rhoda will be corrected, I don't think you'll have that problem.

1:04:17That's a code,

1:04:18like I've got. So

1:04:19um Commissioner Mariano uh the whole village concept requires the density and that's the lowest I think density of the village on these edges. Am I correct? So um I think that that um on a 40 foot lot you're not building a huge house full of you know five teenagers. So I I think what maybe Um can help is let me ask you if you have extra parking spaces for

1:04:49guests. um in the neighborhood, say at the park or somewhere. And I and I I think that, you know, we need to be sure that there are some extra parking spaces. For people in the community.

1:05:01Yeah, and and that's where we were headed in the individual discussions. I think all of these issues are are those logistical issues. And that's why I think what the board should ask PDD to do is to start an LDC review process, engage the builder community. You can very easily address in your code the road right-of-way with If you're going to have parking on one side, you already have a process for the determination whether on-street parking is allowed. You certainly

1:05:31could have a requirement that in a subdivision that they have to have X number or X percent of guest parking spaces provided. I mean, I share this pain. I I lived in a townhome community on Lake Tarpon until two years ago where We, as the HOA board, had to decide to amend our regulations. We built the guest parking spaces at the end of the street so that everybody wasn't parking in front of my house and everyone else's house. So I understand that. But I think

1:06:01you can control that in site plan review, construction plans, and most importantly, have a land development code amendment that specifies that you have to have X Part. parking spaces, you know, unless you have more space in the driveway. We also discuss making sure the depth of the driveway makes sure that parked cars will clear the sidewalk. I mean, we have that issue all the time. You know, that a pickup truck or a large SUV extends over the sidewalk. But I think all these, in my view, are technical,

1:06:31logistical site plan, construction plan issues that you need to address in the code. But I really hate to see you start denying MPs, MPUD zonings and V OPH when we literally have approved 15 MPDs with eight or 10,000 units. Units that have an abundance of 40, 50, and 60-foot lots. We're suddenly telling Mr. and Mrs. Blazewski, sorry, you woke up on the wrong day and you can't have the same approval that 15 people have gotten for 8,000

1:07:02units. That's a dramatic issue in V OPH if we start reducing lot sizes.

1:07:08And I would say this is one of the reasons why I'm 40-foot lots. I personally like rear loaded lots. And you see that in Bexley and Starkey and other places. But um there may be some people here from the public that want to speak and then you can come back after. Thank you. Thank you. Is uh anyone

1:07:23here signed up to speak? Uh no one has signed up on WebEx, but we do have five uh people who have signed up in person. Okay. I think because we're gonna have a very busy day, we're gonna ask you to line up. So the uh I'll call them in order that I've signed up. Uh first initial B last name George Next person, Ken Miller. Next person, Kenneth. Last name is hard for me to read. Lara Lana. And then the next person Is it uh

1:07:54Kylie? Uh Suspitus. Thank you. And then John uh Tomsu. Oh no,

1:08:03John's

1:08:04on a different one. Oh is

1:08:05he John's on seven o'clock. Oh unless he's speaking to this one too, which he He's allowed to if he wants to. Uh and did you call Justina?

1:08:14This one?

1:08:14Okay.

1:08:18Okay, come on up, Justina. Did not um she didn't sign up, but that's right. Oh

1:08:22I emailed um the agenda

1:08:24coordinator

1:08:24yesterday. We turned

1:08:26No turns

1:08:27up. A clicker? Oh it's right here. Okay. All right, good afternoon. Justina Gale, Florida Design Consultants, 20525 Amberfield Drive, Lando Lakes, Florida. And I'm here representing the property owners to the east.

1:08:45And I'm sorry, you have to state whether you're sworn or not.

1:08:48Yes, I am. Thank you.

1:08:51Um, so the Plazuki MPUD, it is a part of the VOPH. And in the VOPH land use vision plan, um, it as you can see, it's in village F and it is on the neighborhood edge. The neighborhood edge in the vision plan has always shown two dwelling units per cross.

1:09:15Also with the Boger MPD that was recently approved, the conceptual plan also showed the Pluzoski piece as two dwelling units per gross acre. And the Boger MPD, which was designated as more intense and closer to the neighborhood center, as Commissioner Mariano was stating, was at 3.3. which is less than what is proposed currently. Currently they are e they're asking To increase the dwelling units from two dwelling units

1:09:45per gross acre to five dwelling units per gross acre. The proposed density is too high and is not consistent with the adjacent neighbors and development. We have the Knollwood Acres property, which is all residential, one dwelling unit an acre. We have res three, and then we have some large property owners that I represent, Mr. Kenneth Land. Lane, Glassbrenner and then the Skinners and the Shatzburger that are more than 10 dwelling unit, it's only one acre,

1:10:16or I'm sorry, there's one home on more than 10 acres. Um, so our my client is requesting that we lower the density to two dwelling units, which would be a maximum of 81 homes instead of 200 homes. Also, Um oh actually can I go back? Um, there is a mix that they're proposing, however, there are only five 60-foot lots. We are asking that we increase the 60-foot lots

1:10:46to a minimum of 20, and this would be 25% of the development would have 60-foot lots. Right now, the rest of them are all 50s and 40s. Um the master roadway plan, currently Elam is a 70-foot right-of-way and it is shown to the east of the Plazuki MPD. Um none of it of which is shared with the Plazoski MPD. Um, there are impacts right now with the Elam right-of-way. Um, the the

1:11:16way it's designed and shown right now, it's impacting approximately seven structures and um four homes and barns and so forth, the way it's shown. So we are requesting that the Elam right-of-way is shifted at least 35 feet to the west so that it is fair. And it this right away is shared with the Plazowski MPD site. So these are the homes and the trees that the Elam right away would be wiping out if you built

1:11:47this right now. So these are the type of homes that represent Pasco County and this is what we want to see. We don't want to wipe these homes out for 40 foot lots. Um and also the right-of-way, I we would like um staff to take a look. It's it doesn't even make sense the way it's planned right now. Um it's going through Elam right-of-way going through the new Innovation Academy. So the alignment doesn't even make sense the way it's aligned right now. Also, we would like to

1:12:17request on the east side that we have a 50-foot rural enclave buffer.

1:12:24So our requests are to lower the density to two dwelling units an acre. Um, and the lower density would be consistent with V OPH to add a mix of lot sizes. Instead of only five sixty foot lots, we would like uh to increase that to twenty sixty foot lots. Um we would like to request of the rural 50-foot enclave buffer on the east side, and we would also like to shift the alignment at least 35 feet to the west to share

1:12:54with the Plouziski site. Thank you. Are there any questions?

1:12:59Madam Chair? Yes, Commissioner Weightman. It's okay, I do have a question.

1:13:07And you can answer, and obviously the applicant can come back and answer as well. Tell me more about this right away.

1:13:15Right away we were speaking of

1:13:17Yeah.

1:13:19Okay.

1:13:20It's highlighted in pink, Elam Road.

1:13:28So this is a vision right?

1:13:30Yes.

1:13:32Do we have a guesstimated?

1:13:35Date of destroy destruction, I would assume not, right? Mm-hmm.

1:13:40No, no, that's part of the financial plan, the VLPH financial plan. So we'd have to pull that out of there.

1:13:46And it's uh Commission Moore and Someone tell me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that road And n you know, I don't know how where that alignment came from. Maybe someone can tell us, but That road only gets built if these people decide to develop. Is what I was told.

1:14:03Right. So So I think when you if you're If

1:14:08Yeah, my clients are not going to develop. The property. This is where their their family is going to be. They have wetlands and um beautiful lakes in the back, so there's not even room to develop. And these aren't these are legacy type of homes you don't want to, you know.

1:14:25Right, right.

1:14:26Gorgeous. Yeah. And you'd be we counted all the trees.

1:14:29So the trigger. Sorry. So the trigger would be uh and I need staff to answer this. You don't have to count now, maybe w after everybody speaks, the so uh what commissioner or chairwoman Starkey was stating was that um the vision road would be triggered if these property owners, e.g. your clients, were developed the property. Is that correct? Okay.

1:14:52Yeah.

1:14:52Okay.

1:14:55Yeah, I w I was but I was curious about that one.

1:14:58Madam Chair, before she goes though, uh I've met with I've met with the applicant as well as uh just seen her and and the neighbors there. Um and I looked at this road really close for a long, long time. I will say the last meeting I had with the applicant showed me that the line to the north lines up pretty well with it. Um I don't think this is an unreasonable request as far as the right of way goes. And Commissioner Starkey it might not be a bad thing and Christine as well you're worried about kids. If nothing else in that thirty five foot Right away gets opened

1:15:28up. That could be a a north south connecting trail. until the roadway gets finished all the way down, if it ever gets done or not. Uh if the road ever does get

1:15:38a school coming in down south.

1:15:40Exactly. So there's access to you do and things that happen down there. That roadway, the way it's actually aligned, um I'm glad you isolated exactly where those homes were. that home in the very bottom, you're cutting like right across his yard. I mean that thing should actually if it's gonna go down a little bit further before it even bends over where the home can be preserved a little bit more. Um And looking at Nillwood, if there were one per acre, as I said before, to have a forty-foot lot right beside that, or even if it's a sixty-five-foot lot, that's a big Big

1:16:10drop as well. Um and the percentage I think were pretty strong. The argument with Bulgar at three point three, which should be more intense than this one here. There's another good argument why the density is just, you know, a bit high from what they're asking, in my opinion. But thank you.

1:16:25Thank you very much. Thank you. And um I'm gonna have a question for staff when I'll when all the applicants are done. I think we have some questions on the roads. Okay. And I'm I'm trying to understand if if my recollection, cut come on up and be ready to speak. Mr. Lane, right? Um That that swing over to the side was requested by the school district. 'Cause that you know, it's like why does it come down and go right over is that Mr. Skinner's house? I don't know. I mean it's just odd. So we have some questions on the roads.

1:16:57So I wanted someone to be explaining that to us. Okay.

1:17:01Uh my name is Kenneth Lane. I uh live in the lower house, uh the house on the left hand side, uh the lower one. But uh a couple of issues that I wanted to address. Uh one is to Mr. O'Toole's comment. About the density. When the V OPH was created back in two thousand and five, most of this area was open pasture. Mr.

1:17:23Lane, you need to quickly say your name and address.

1:17:25I'm sorry. My name is Kenneth Lane, [address removed].

1:17:29And you were sworn in.

1:17:30I'm sorry?

1:17:31And you were sworn in.

1:17:32I was sworn in.

1:17:33Thank you, sir. Now you may proceed.

1:17:34Thank you. But when the village of Pasadena Hills was created in two thousand and five. This twenty two thousand acres that it encompassed was mostly open farmland. And the comment that Mr. Tool just said, Joel Toole said. was it the Pulowski track? uh is being denied the development. Well, all this other development is open cow pasture. The Nollwood Acres, my home, my neighbor's home, Sunny Glass Printer, and a number of other homes

1:18:05around us were already there. So, you know, all of a sudden we're gonna have this ghetto, you know, surrounding us or or next to us. And the other comment that I wanted to make was one that uh that you brought up, Commissioner, and that's with the children. When you look at the uh area, let me see if I can get this area here. My track is the upper right hand corner outlined in red. I got about 36, 37 acres. When you look at with the with the number of homes here, even if you reduce the density to eighty

1:18:35homes. You're still gonna have at least 40 homes with children. Where are they going to play? I mean, I was a young kid once myself, as all of us were. We've got lakes over here. We've got all this beautiful park area and what have you. And I don't want to have to be dealing with trespassing. And unfortunately, when you look at this design up here, there's very little room for them to play, to go out play baseball or whatever, kids being what they're going to do. Uh, they're gonna be over on our side. So that was one of the comments that I wanted

1:19:05to also add to this. But I'm really opposed to the density because of the location to existing homes that are already there. Uh on the west side of Curly Road, it's open pasture land. There's not a problem. To the north of Tyndall Road, there's not a problem. So basically with that, that kind of concludes my comments, but I'm just concerned. About the total distance.

1:19:27You have another minute.

1:19:28I'm sorry?

1:19:29You you can keep going for a minute if you want.

1:19:31Well, that's all right. That's tough. And there are others here that would like to address it as well. All

1:19:36right. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thanks.

1:19:43Name and address and let us know if you've been sworn.

1:19:46Yes, hi, good afternoon. My name's Brenda George, [address removed]. And I was sworn in when you did the group swearing in. Thank you. Okay. Um, so I'm a uh 35-year resident of Nollwood Acres, so been there a while. And um it has been a quiet neighborhood. Um approximately 15 years ago, all the residents and landowners had to pay $5,000 to have all the roads redone in Nollwood Acres. Originally I thought it was going to be 200

1:20:16homes in this development, but then now it seems like it's 140 homes. What I've heard. Um So if um Plans go ahead as the developer would like where they are coming through the Nobot Acres. Um, I'm thinking so that's 140 homes times two drivers plus additional drivers within Some of the homes. That's over 300 additional cars on our quiet neighborhood roads, um, which we connect to um

1:20:47Curly curly. Curly Road. And I think you had said Wesley Chapel Boulevard, but it's actually Curly Road.

1:20:53No, no,

1:20:53no. Something else. Okay. Subject.

1:20:58So um definitely concerned about the excessive speeding because Knollwood Loop, Greenwood Loop is a straightaway, it's a big horseshoe um that would get into this development. And there are times already that I can be standing in my yard. And the cars, e even some of them um uh utility vehicles or whatever. I mean they've got to be going 60 or plus down that road because it's a long straightaway both front of my house and also behind my house. If they um wishes

1:21:29their wishes come true, goal comes true, um what would be their guarantee or what would be their responsibility as far as maintaining the road with like 300 plus cars coming through our neighborhood. Um and then also um we have elderly people that take walks in our neighborhood. Children are on bikes. Uh people walk their dogs. So I just have a bit real safety issue. issue and concern and

1:21:59I guess that's it. Thank you very

1:22:00much. Madam Chairman before she goes though, it's it is projected for two hundred homes.

1:22:06Okay, because somewhere in our neighborhood email we had received 140. Which makes it in every worse. times two, I don't do math. And then p so then it's probably way so it's be way like five hundred, six hundred plus cars to our neighborhood. And one more thing you made me think about Um I heard something about it would only be for like emergency vehicles. Well how would that work? How is that gonna prevent everybody else cutting through there? Right. Uh so all the emergency

1:22:36vehicles will have a key or something? Yeah, I know there's a gate.

1:22:39Signal, it's a signal on the tire.

1:22:43Yeah, so we just

1:22:45have a a real concern with uh that, you know, 500 now plus cars coming through our neighborhood. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thanks.

1:22:57My name is Kenneth Miller, [address removed]. And I have been sworn in.

1:23:04Okay, great. Thank you.

1:23:06I am the president of the HOA for Nollwood Acres and represent 90 homeowners who have one-acre plots. We're concerned about the density that is ne gonna be built next door to us. It is way too high for our area. It is not close to the village center. but is farther away and should be, as has been expressed before, Eighty. uh units should be compatible. With that like a half an acre or so per house. That

1:23:37would eliminate a lot of your problems with your parking. The other concern that I have and everybody else is about this access. Kindle Road access of the Beluski property. All they have to do is come in there. That's your entrance. If the development c happens, then you're gonna have the Elon Road entrance. Absolutely no reason, and no need to open Peachtree Lane. into the Plotzewski development. It should stay as an emergency exit and entrance only.

1:24:08Thank you.

1:24:10Thank you. And next. And if there's anyone else that wants to speak, please line up behind um this young lady or else we will Cut that off.

1:24:19Before my time starts, um I have 116 um petitions that we had signed by our community. Oh, am I able to

1:24:27all in favor? Aye. Think you give it over here? Thank you.

1:24:34So again, good afternoon. My name is Kylie Sespedes. I live at [address removed]. My mother lives at uh [address removed], and my sister and grandmother purchased a home. I'm sorry, yes, I was sworn in. Yes. And my sister and grandmother purchased the home right next door to me. Oh my gosh. So I'm speaking on behalf of the family as well as on behalf of Nollwood Acres. So first I wanted to thank you for your time. Mm-hmm. We recognize that growth equates to progress and more funding to Pasco

1:25:05County, but we just ask that the Board of County Commissioners and the Fluzowskis respect our established community and please take us into consideration. Nullwood Acres has existed since November 2nd, 1973, and is a well-established community, and we are accustomed to a quiet way of life. Everyone who lives there is living there because of the open space scenery and wildlife. If you approve the Plezowski MPUD request, you will be ruining that way of life.

1:25:32We're already dealing with the construction of hundreds of houses being built around us, and we only have one road that leads to us, and it's only one lane each way. Hundreds of additional houses means hundreds of additional cars on Curly Road. The speed limit has been reduced now to as low as 30, and we now have two traffic circles, which only impede traffic and cause more slowdowns, let alone if there are additional houses built right next to us. This request, in addition to the other requests out there, will continue to further ruin the area by overdevelopment. Development is

1:26:02good, but there is a fine line between doing good for versus ruining the beauty of the area. If you continue to approve war home sites without widening the existing roads, like Curly Road, for example, or completing the projects that have already begun to alleviate congestion and widening roads in neighboring areas were being set up for failure. We are concerned about the promises that were made thus far and now might not be fulfilled by the VOPH Planning Committee. um about the buffers and then the easement uh

1:26:32at the end of Petrie Lane, which should have only been used as an emergency exit and they said would eventually be permanently sealed off. Um, but now if you make Peachtree Lane um leading into this community. you're adding to our already established community, a community as stated before, where we have one acre lots, not 40 foot lots. Through the alienation of property we understand that the Pelusi have every right to develop the land abiding to Nollwood acres. However, the development

1:27:02of that land

1:27:05uh at the current proposed density would hinder our rights. Due to proximity, the Plezouski MPUD should conform to the standards of Nollwood Acres so as not to ruin the integrity and values of our properties and our way of life. Nollwood Acres has a hundred about one hundred and fifteen acres total and eighty six home sites. The Plazoski MPUD has only forty acres and are planning two hundred home sites. The Pasouski MPUD only has thirty-four percent of the acreage Nollwood Acres has, but they're planning on two

1:27:36hundred and thirty percent of the homes. If you decide to approve their request today, please do so at least with the contingency that they decrease to match Knollwood Acres. The current planning does not carefully Consider the dozens of large grandfather oak trees, which will be bulldoze and the natural beauty and the habitats of the animals, including foxes, golden hawks, and protected species such as gopher tortoises and sandhill cranes. Thank you very much. I'm sorry, I thought I had a little more time because I was speaking on behalf of the community. I thought it said five minutes. Is

1:28:06that okay to finish?

1:28:07I

1:28:07don't know. She would have if she's representing a group, she'd have five minutes.

1:28:11I didn't receive anything to there was an announcement. Okay, so uh you're representing the HOA? Right. That that's why I handed in there.

1:28:21And she and she said she was me representing multiple people.

1:28:24I know, but uh anybody could come up and say they're representing five people on the block and get extra minutes. And if that happens, we're gonna be here till tomorrow. I think I was the only one who was gonna do five minutes. Is that okay? All right. Is it okay? I know, but that That's the way we've done it is you have to be representing like your HOA or your C D D district. Right. I am speaking on behalf of the

1:28:45HOA right now.

1:28:46But since there's only one person behind you, I'll let you go. Thank

1:28:48you so much. I appreciate that. Um Yeah.

1:28:54So as I was saying, it will affect the protected species such as gopher tortoises and sandhill cranes. We're also concerned about the planned elevation. Should that land be developed? What would be done to ensure the elevation will not negatively impact the neighboring properties? We'd like to uh time to view that watershed plan with engineering certification. Um and to make sure that they've researched all potential impacts of flooding. Um our fear is that the additional development will directly flood at least five properties that are adjacent to the Bluzowski property. We

1:29:24have already seen significant flooding in our community due to the building of the Kirkland Ranch Academy of Innovation. We would also like a guarantee from uh from someone that whoever would build there, um, should it be approved, will be held to the ruling that the VOPH uh planning committee, as well as any rulings that are made here regarding the easement at the end of Pea Tree Lane, will remain strictly as that emergency use and that it'll be sealed off eventually. Um And that's all okay. Okay. Thank you very much. Did a

1:29:54good job, by the way.

1:29:58Hi, I'm Sonic Glass Sprinter. Uh I have been sworn in. Could they bring up the map again showing the the houses? Throwing the whole pro all the properties here.

1:30:09Yeah, can you bring up the picture with the houses?

1:30:12That's good. That's good. I I own the twenty five acres outlined in green on the east side of Plazensi's property. Uh if you see outlined there in those red circles, those are two of my buildings. And then the lower one is another one of my buildings, my barn. Um My house is about seventy feet from the Blazensky property. And as you see I've got lakes on the east side of me, so I don't even though

1:30:42I have twenty five acres, I don't have twenty-five acres of usable land. Um when I first bought in two thousand and seven One of the members of V O P H showed me a master plan. Which showed everything My property and everything to the west of it being estates. We're on the outer edge of that village. And those were all supposed to be estates. Now, quite frankly, that

1:31:12plan is no longer a member of V O P H so I can't blame him. That's up. I think that's part of the reason he's not a member anymore.

1:31:23At any rate, we were all supposed to be estates on that side. And of course I've got one house on twenty-five acres. uh that's not quite what I had planned, by no means. And it's of course No it is They say acre lots, I think they're more than acres lots. Matter of fact, I own a lot down there that's an acre and a half. So a lot of those lots are more than an acre. Uh if they were estates we wouldn't have a problem with parking. We wouldn't have a par problem with

1:31:54with drainage. We wouldn't have a problem with Cli kids climbing the fence and coming on our property and making us liable for them getting hurt on our property. That's a that's a real problem if you own a large piece of property and some of you probably already know that. I think I have an insurance certificate from Ron Oakley for his cows being on my property.

1:32:19The Vision Road. I'm trying to keep them over. Just one more thing on the Vision Road. As you can see, that splits my South 10 acres, runs within 20 feet of my house. If they're gonna put that road in they need Polinski needs to share the right-of-way. So the right-of-way should be taken off the east side of his property. for Vision Road as well as the west side of mine.

1:32:43Now I will never develop it because the way the Vision Road goes through there it ruins my property. I can't My property wouldn't be a good thing. produce enough homes. To pay for that road. So especially the way it splits the property. So I've got numerous problems with this plan. Thank you.

1:33:04Thank you very much. Um okay, this is our last speaker.

1:33:10Hi, Kathy Schmidt, [address removed]. Sorry, I'm used to talking. That's okay. Um I have been sworn in. Right, thank you. Um I just Wanna say with this right away going through Peachtree Lane. My grandkids ride their bikes through or we've had several young, younger families move in with their kids. They ride their bikes through that neighborhood. If we have traffic coming in and out, we have they're, you know, they're smaller roads. They're not real wide. We don't have enough room for cars going by and coming this way, coming that way, dump

1:33:40trucks coming in. We've got dump trucks that come in from the development across from us. that like to use the horseshoe. It it's the roads are gonna be ruined. We've got to watch out for our kids. I wanna watch out for my grandkids. Having it as an emergency exit or entrance, I get that. But other than that, it it needs to not be anything else. That's all. Okay, thank

1:34:04you. All right. Would the applicant like to come back up?

1:34:09Oh. Mr Gasway. Part of the applicants team.

1:34:15Part

1:34:15of the

1:34:15app.

1:34:17Good afternoon. I'm Pat Gasway with Height Design. 5904 Hampton Oaks Parkway. Tampa, Florida. Uh I have the luxury of representing Walter and Ruth Plazuki. I'm joined uh this afternoon by Christy Barrero. She'll be uh taking a portion of this uh rebuttal. Uh wanted to um Well you've got that um um PowerPoint up. Uh

1:34:48I think that'll probably be good. Um when when we look at the roadway network, there's some important things to remember. Um we we started this this venture uh many years ago and in 2008 when it was adopted, um you know, this award-winning plan. uh had forty one thousand acres, I mean had forty-one thousand units spread over twenty-two thousand acres. And the way that that is orchestrated is about twelve

1:35:18thousand acres didn't change. And on 10,000 acres, we selected that land because of its development potential. And we decided to place thirteen villages that in total carry that balance of the development. the way that that is effectuated properly is we have no of development. at the crossroads of a grid system of streets, and that grid system of streets are adopted by ordinance. That

1:35:49ordinance was adopted and it solidifies the alignments of those rights of way in a master roadway plan that covers the 22,000 acre area. The the the roadways that you see on that master plan. For example, um Well love your pointer. Tell you what?

1:36:14We gotta get that thing fixed.

1:36:17I'm

1:36:17MF.

1:36:26for the interruption. Um for for example, um Prospect Here. And uh Kiefer here are connected by three roadways, right? One is currently called Wort Road. It's being renamed to the Elam Extension. The other is New River Boulevard, which is a critical piece of the location of the village center.

1:36:57as well as North South Avenue B, All of those roads are key components of the roadway network. These are two-lane roadways. They interconnect multiple primary roadways, which are either four or six lane roadways. The additional roadways that you see here, like Prospect, like Tyndall, and like Kiefer, are all components of that grid of streets. It's important for those streets to be able to support the adjacent

1:37:27development, and it's important for everyone who's going to pursue an incremental development model Right. 22,000 acres aren't going to be developed by one person. They're going to be developed in increments, in individual pieces. So they must have the predictability of the locations of those roadways solidified. That's why this board adopted by ordinance the master roadway plan defining those rights of way. Um When when we talk about this particular

1:37:57roadway, which is we call it the Elam Extension, because when you look further to the south, the eastern alignment of Elam, when it crosses Curley, it then turns northward. And last year, um, the school board asked when they purchased 120 acres on the south side of Kiefer that we shift that roadway. And the board considered their request favorably and shifted that right-of-way to the

1:38:27eastern 70 feet.

1:38:29Are you saying we did?

1:38:30Yes. Yeah, we

1:38:31did.

1:38:32So the eastern 70 feet of their 120 feet. Acres. Unfortunately, Justina's map is a little bit askew. I happen to know exactly where that right-of-way is because we put it exactly where the school board wanted us to, which is the 70 feet in the most eastern portion of their property. That's why that point of intersection with Kiefer is where it's at. Um this alignment of this roadway follows the existing alignment

1:39:02of WERT, And um and Commissioner Starkey, you asked a very good question. How do we decide where these roads go? And we do it based on the overall model, right? So when that road goes all the way from the Clinton Avenue extension all the way down and curves to Curley and goes across Curley all the way over to become an intersection with what will become the Boyette Road extension, these roadway alignments

1:39:33are considered in their entirety. The goal is to have those alignments affect the fewest number of owners, not parcels, but owners, right? As as testimony was given before, many of these parcels are owned by common owners. So that alignment being Outside the Plazuki's property was selected particularly in order to achieve the most reasonable alignment in terms of not only the people that are

1:40:03affected, but also the environmental constraints that are included in the regulatory process. So this is a thoughtful thing. This is not an ad hoc thing. This is something that is long since been. and considered and on balance we believe that predictability is necessary. In this development pattern of this particular village, the segment of Elam from Tyndall down to Kiefer. would likely only be

1:40:33necessary If the landowners that provided testimony to you today that said they don't want a road, they're in great shape because they'd be the only ones that would want it. The development of those parcels, although their perspective today is that they don't want development, as that changes hands through generations, that opinion might change. That's been my experience in the last 40 years in this development business. But until that change

1:41:04happens, the necessity of that roadway linkage would be unnecessary. The testimony provided previously was correct. The intensity of development in this area, even with the application at five units per acre, We'll likely not be that dense. And consequently, will survive perfectly well without that roadway segment until that portion of the property is elected to be developed. So those

1:41:34are key components to the roadway discussion. Let's keep in mind our application today. does not include that road. It has nothing to do with that road because that road is reflected on the adjacent property that doesn't want it. Now when when it comes to the the the idea that you know the Alignment is objectionable because it comes close to people's houses. if

1:42:05that alignment were uh desired to change. It has currently adopted rules in the Master Roadway Plan that accommodates their ability to select an alternative alignment within their property boundaries. because it's important for the predictability of the implementation by all the adjacent property owners outside their land to be able to count on that road being there when it's necessary.

1:42:36Any questions about that roadway?

1:42:39Um Uh go ahead, Commissioner.

1:42:42I just have a comment. When you look back at When did you say it was two thousand eight they were approved?

1:42:50When you look back at two thousand eight and you're looking at twenty twenty two thousand acres or so as a whole picture. Mm-hmm and you set up these villages on that on that map, they all look great and they seem to work out good because of one thing. You haven't put it on the land itself. Until now it comes forward. Right. to see how it affects people that are already there in that area. And

1:43:21then so. In thinking of it in that term That's a hurdle you have to get through. to go forward with the villages as you have planned 'em so far. And like you say, if the folks don't want that road and they decide they don't want it, but Years down the road and They pass and Other family members have that and want to sell it, then it could be a road. It could be, yes. Right. And any emergency. uh roadway that connects

1:43:52to like no wood acres. That is not gonna be used on a daily usage for anything other than an emergency. Never to be a through fare through another neighborhood like that. And it's not that's just not gonna happen. But it during emergency and if they need to get there, then emergency vehicles will be able to use it at that time and they'll have a button in their trucks or whatever they can open that up and go. But that's the only time that'll be used. So there's no extra traffic being shoved into Nowood Acres. that

1:44:22can't get there other than emerge to exit because that's not gonna happen. So But all of the vegetes look good on paper until you put it in there and you affect the lives that are sitting there in the spot that you're going to act on. Well that's kind of where we're at.

1:44:38Yeah. Uh um could you put up um Google Earth of this area, please. Because I want to make sure Commissioner Mariano. that you see what's going on on the other side of Noble Dakers. Because um And I don't know what that destiny is over there, but I'm looking at Google Earth. And you see um Is that Epperson over there?

1:45:05It it would be Epperson that's on the east side.

1:45:08On the other side of Curley. There's Epperson, there's Maratha. I mean uh so Knollwood in effect is a little enclave

1:45:19Well

1:45:20it's a very nice uh state homes and homes

1:45:23in the area. They're

1:45:24on very nice lots.

1:45:25And that land increase in value because it's gonna be an unusual community of large lots surrounded by much more dense communities. So and I hey, Starkey family's been here a long time and I can tell you we had a house Well, my husband's family had a house surrounded by thousands of acres and then neighborhoods came in and it was very different. our neighbors became very different than what you know, what we were used to. And that We have one of the fastest growing counties in this country. And it's It's

1:45:57gonna be different, everybody. So um so show where is

1:46:01it's

1:46:01a little

1:46:01farther north than that. There you go. Keep on going.

1:46:07Okay, and then a little over

1:46:09to the right.

1:46:13So

1:46:14Yeah, but um but I'm just saying no

1:46:17it's

1:46:17across the street from Nellwood Acres

1:46:18on the other side this this is Epperson, right? This is Murata. And uh this is the the new school of innovation. Um but this is no wood acres right here.

1:46:30So you see uh dense much denser Development to the left. Um and there's still a parcel to the west of this parcel that would be less dense. So we're going to do that. When it comes in. So it's less dense, a little more dense, more, more, more, more until you get to the village center. That's classic development patterns of historical nature around the world.

1:46:54And and I'll uh I'll turn it over to Ms. Barrero to uh to talk about density. Yes, ma'am.

1:47:00I just have a quick question. So just to confirm what you had said, if Mr. Kenneth and Mr. Glassbrenner do not build, then Elam is not gonna be built.

1:47:09It through their property, yes.

1:47:10Correct. Okay. And then my second question is can you discuss this Previously. Now the distance it really wouldn't make that big of a distance difference if Elam was built because Curley to Elam is only a qu half of a mile.

1:47:25Uh right. So so Curley to Elam is about a half a mile. Um

1:47:30so you wouldn't even re need to you could go curly and to Tyndall and just go around it. You don't even have to go

1:47:37right. The the the fine-grained nature of these two-lane streets are pretty close together, right? So they're they're they're far closer together than the rest of the county where we typically look for a one mile spacing for for those roadway intervals. Um here we're we're less than a mile.

1:47:54Okay, and as per the project as it is right now, it is only an emergency exit.

1:48:01That is the way the the application is currently written. Yes.

1:48:04Okay. And I wanna be um I'm not sure where we are on time and how much time we took of your time asking questions. So I'm gonna try and keep this moving because we have a big hearing after this one. So come on up real quick. Thanks.

1:48:18Madam Chair, just one thing before she speaks. Um on the other side, the New River Road, that's about a half a mile too.

1:48:26Wait on that river, Red.

1:48:29New the

1:48:29river goes

1:48:30right to the the center.

1:48:31The what?

1:48:32Right in the center of the village square. Oh. That New Road? Tyndall. Uh Curley Road is a half mile that way. And New River's about a half mile the other way.

1:48:45Good afternoon. Christy Barrera with Height Design, 5904 Hampton Oaks Parkway, Tampa, Florida, representing the applicant. And I just wanted to touch on the density issue that you all had a question about.

1:49:02Before you get into it, is there is there anyone else from the applicant speaking? Okay, thank you.

1:49:09So we're proposing five units per acre, but that's the maximum. So the yellow is the neighborhood edge, which is a maximum of two units per acre. We're proposing five units per acre on the Plazoski property. And then that's the tan neighborhood general. And then the brown is uh the village center, the neighborhood core. So we did contemplate and in 2008 the um comprehensive plan did contemplate

1:49:39the rural enclave and that's why we have that fifty foot buffer that includes landscaping um to have Uh Open space area between the existing rural enclave, Nollwood Acres, and this uh more dense development villages of Pasadena Hills. So that is on the edge. And if you also look closely, um the Plazoski property is only adjacent to two and a quarter of those lots on Nollwood Acres. There's one lot

1:50:10in Nollwood Acres that the side yard Is adjacent to Plazouski and one that the backyard is adjacent to Plazowski. There's also another one that a portion of the back backyard is adjacent to the property. So Again, five units per acre is the maximum, though as Pat said, we may not be able to get to that density. Depends on who the developer is and what they choose to develop on the site.

1:50:35I think it's also important Can you flip to the next slide? To remember that each of these villages requires a mix of neighborhood edge, neighborhood general, and neighborhood um core. So this is a type 2 B village. There is type 1 villages that are the most dense, type 2 villages that are kind of the medium density and type 3 villages that tend to have a

1:51:05lot of natural features in the village. This is a type 2 so it's kind of the middle density village. So in this village, we have to have a minimum of 40% neighborhood general, and we can have up to a maximum of 50% neighborhood general. That's that maximum of five units per acre. So between 40 and 50% of the village has to be that tan color. And I know this chart's hard to see. I don't know if you can see it on your screens, but we are at 40.75%. So

1:51:36we can't change to that neighborhood edge color or the percentages wouldn't work out correctly in this village.

1:51:46So we feel that the rural enclave buffer, as well as the 40 and 50 foot-wide lots that we've agreed not to have all 40s as the minimum, um, make this a an appropriate lot size for this particular project in this village, in the villages of Pasadena Hills overall. And I'm happy to answer any specific questions that you guys have about density.

1:52:11I don't care. Yes, Mr. Oakley. So if anything changed that percentage, say it changed to a lesser density. Then that deals with the financial plan and so it throws something else off. So you'd have to pick up that density somewhere else in that village.

1:52:29Correct. So something that's currently colored in yellow would need to change to tan.

1:52:34Mm-hmm. Yeah.

1:52:37Madam Chairman M

1:52:38Yes.

1:52:39Did this used to be edge or has it always been general?

1:52:43This did used to be Edge. Let me go back to the previously approved. So this, so this is the third zoning in Village F that's come before you. The first one was in 2010, Evans Nursery, and that's on the north side of Tyndall. It includes the two northern red quadrants of the commercial area. The second one, which is currently approved, is the Boger MPUD, and that's the one that's outlined here. And it's a mix of neighborhood edge

1:53:14and neighborhood general. And Commissioner Mariano, I think you mentioned earlier that Boger was about three point three units per acre. As you can see, it's a blend of two and five. And Bogor also has wetlands that you can see on this graphic, but also quite a bit of floodplain on the property that reduced the developable acres on this site. It is approved for 50-foot 51-foot wide lots in the neighborhood edge and 40 and 50 foot, 40 and 51

1:53:44foot. foot wide lots in the neighborhood general.

1:53:51So uh so the differences between the adopted village F master plan, you can see that currently boat or I'm sorry, the Plazoski property is the neighborhood edge, two units per acre. But you'll also notice that Elam Road goes almost straight down. And again, when the school board requested an alignment change That's when um The we we suggested that Plazuki get the

1:54:21additional units and that the other area where the road had changed go to some of that neighborhood edge color. Again to balance out that forty percent minimum of neighborhood general.

1:54:39That answered your question, Jack.

1:54:43I'm sure I got a question for staff. Question more. When they're done, I'm a question for staff.

1:54:47Okay, I think you're done with your presentation. Unless there's any other questions, yes.

1:54:54So you won't. Um whoever's Well, it's to us. It is to us next. Who's the lead on that? Stuff.

1:55:01Um who wants to take a question? Oh on staff question. Okay, come on.

1:55:06Yeah.

1:55:10Well let's go. I know it was the the applicant just um responded, but I would like staff to respond. Um let's talk about this vision road a little bit more. Um obviously the the uh gentleman and I forgot his name, I apologize, um, has concerns about um this vision road, you know, going through his property. Um at the same time, you know, we know some of these things are done many, many years down the road and certain things trigger them. Um, it would take an act of this board to remove that vision route?

1:55:41Correct.

1:55:45Do we actually um removed the vision rope when the school came in. this vision road was gonna cut the school property into uh two thirds, one third. So it's moved to the east to come around the end of the school property where it would not affect the building of the school and where it is by a thoroughfare road road coming through the middle of of a school property.

1:56:09Well why

1:56:10that was moved to Kiefer.

1:56:12Right. And I and I appreciate that. I just

1:56:14And what we're talking about here is the part that would actually go to the north.

1:56:18All and only if the

1:56:20truth could develop. Only if those neighbors in that alignment. approve development of it going through their property 'cause They would either sell their property or whatever, but that may not happen now and it won't happen in the future. So that road

1:56:35It may not. Let me keep going for a second there. Let me let staff answer my questions. Um the Polanskys though property, whoever the developer is, um would actually probably give an access to that road, would they not? Would that development not be they

1:56:47do they would do a stub out to Their

1:56:50property

1:56:50edge, yeah.

1:56:51So this property are taking the brunt of a the entire brunt of another development. On that red. In reality. 'Cause they're not gonna be able to put the density that this property does. Isn't that kind of true?

1:57:03Um they they could. They're in the neighborhood general area.

1:57:08Yeah, but they you you looked at the property, they don't they can't put the amount of density and the amount of homes on their property that

1:57:14Well due to natural constraints and stuff, sure.

1:57:17Right, correct. Yeah. I mean that's a concern. Let me another question, this is probably for staff, not staff, or maybe for the applicant. Um The same gentleman mentioned about the the buffer and I think um their um they're uh planner they hired mentioned the same thing as well. A 50 foot buffer is what is being proposed.

1:57:39Along the rural enclave.

1:57:40Right. Okay. On

1:57:41that's on the um west side. On

1:57:44the west side. Yeah, south south. If I'm looking at the east side. Neighboring The one gentleman's property that showed pictures of her homes. What's the buffer there?

1:57:55They would Buffer as if they were buffering against a roadway in anticipation of the roadway coming in. Um, but it's since the properties to the east are not in a rural enclave, the comp plan doesn't require a rural enclave buffer over there. there. And

1:58:14those it's

1:58:15a good thing.

1:58:18The

1:58:18Conklin does it the bu this board can. Require it. Yes.

1:58:25Okay.

1:58:28But um yeah, if if you want to change the vision road, you have to change the um vision road map, comprehensive plan and those sort of things that it's all tied into. Of course it can't be done.

1:58:42So I uh and listen, I understand how this was set up and DLPH was set up in the past and stuff. At the same time, I think we do need to be considerate of the neighbors that are there. Um you know, especially with some type of buffer, a larger buffer. We don't know if that road's ever gonna come or not. So since that road's not coming, you're st you you made a statement that said the only buffer that's gonna be required is it's considering basically there would be a future road there, correct?

1:59:07Correct. Um But if the properties to the east do sell and get developed, a fifty foot rur rural enclave buffer right in the middle of the community wouldn't really make a whole lot of sense. We don't buffer residential to

1:59:23residential.

1:59:24No.

1:59:27It's all hypothetical. I mean we don't that this gentleman made a statement that he's not gonna develop. Now can we hold him to that? Of course not, right? But at the same time, he did make a statement that's not their plan. They're not they're not uh they're not planning on developing that property. They're planning on keeping that for generations to come, possibly. So I think we need to be considerate of that statement that he made and make sure there's some type of proper buffering there. So he's not looking at the backyard in his rural area of two hundred homes. I'm not saying I'm against the homes of the project itself. We need to

1:59:57be considerate of the neighbors that surround it as well. And I think Pat's going to come up here and give us something back here.

2:00:03Who Be before they happen, can I can I ask Add add a c add a comment to what you're saying? So if the people to the side never come in Right.

2:00:15Talking about to the east?

2:00:16To the east. the r the homes that are there are just butted up to where the edge of the roadway's gonna be pretty much. If you want to protect it, the easiest way to to do it is to move the roadway to 35 foot over,

2:00:32And only when

2:00:36at their wish would that road be crafted, but at least, as you say, they're not bearing the whole brunt of the seventy foot right-of-way shared between them and Plazuki. Which is a major chunk of the road was gonna get done. So if they never s decide to come in, they do have that extra buffer instead of being right up to it. Well that have him do anything different. Let's negotiate.

2:00:58Um I I wanted to point out that The uh land development code. uh does require a 20-foot buffer along the roadway. So our lots Um that are located immediately west of the roadway would by the land development code have a twenty foot buffer there. Um

2:01:22it's a visual road. It's an imaginary road.

2:01:24It doesn't matter. It it doesn't matter.

2:01:27Well, it that does to me.

2:01:28Well the I mean to the land development code it wouldn't matter. The the buffer is still.

2:01:36But again, we don't know if that road's ever gonna be there.

2:01:38Precisely.

2:01:43So the the twenty the the twenty feet would be required around the perimeter of the development. regardless if it were a future roadway or not, it happens to also coincide to the twenty foot buffer that would be required if it were a roadway. So the the answer is is the same. It would be a twenty foot buffer to to ensure that um development on the west side of that roadway is compatible with the future road.

2:02:13And Okay, and so and that road again is not triggered unless there's development and and If I if I'm have this right, they don't have to build the road they don't pay for the road. Right? The the people on the east don't pay for the road. It's Um developer. Well, it's it's impact fee

2:02:37that would have to pay for that. So uh let me let me address that. Um So in the current rules in the financial plan. That type of roadway is called an intermediate roadway, a two-lane roadway. If the uh if the the property owners were to uh develop and trigger that necessity of that roadway. If they go through a transportation analysis, it pretty obviously would be required it because there it it runs

2:03:07through their the middle of the land. Um and and so that in our current rules isn't impact fee creditable. Oh. Right. And and and that was purposefully done. Um Now what what is what is currently ongoing in our office, we're working with your staff. uh on a um potential update of the financial plan. where we now will include those two-lane

2:03:37roadways in the portions of the roads that are impactly creditable. So the the reason that I mentioned that to you is that the what is What is true today on the in the roadway networks ability to be impact fee creditable might come before this board and and ultimately be included in those things because the financial plan appears that it can support that additional expenditure in the capital improvement budget. Just

2:04:09so you understand. Right now, wouldn't be impact fee credible. But in the future it might be.

2:04:16Yeah. May I, Joel too, may I just add briefly to that? And and the reason we're working on that, and we discussed this with Mr. Biles and Mr. Goldstein and the VOPH committee previously, it's really to address exactly the issue that Commissioner Moore just identified. Is we have learned through doing some of these approvals, whereas Commissioner Oakley said, once you ground through this and lay an approval on the ground. you start seeing the pockets and areas where there are there are specific issues. And

2:04:46that would be a financial hardship in all likelihood for a developer to bite off that quantity of land. And build that mandatory road if it's not fee creditable. So what we're working on is a financial plan update. That spreads that cost throughout all of EOPH because it's unfair to put that inordinate burden on that small parcel. You spread that cost by recalculating the surcharge and redistributing that cost through every unit that gets

2:05:16built. So someone that is fortunate that doesn't have one of those roads on a small parcel doesn't get a free pass. Because their surcharge they're paying will factor in that subsidy for that isolated issue. And this isn't a maybe. I mean, we've actually been engaged by the VOPH stakeholders, and we actually are drafting that budget amendment, that financial plan. We've hired an economist to project the cost, and we are working on that with Mr. Goldstein

2:05:47and And and and PDD and Mr. Bao, so that you will be in the next few months. if solving that problem interests you, you're gonna have a potential solution. to this problem. So in closing, there are two things that can happen here. Number one is if those adjacent owners truly do not wish to develop and do not want the road built, they simply don't have to do it. They can elect not to sell their property for development. They can enjoy the lifestyle they have, and

2:06:17they absolutely will not be impacted by the roadway. On the flip side is if they they or their heirs ultimately decide to cash out, and take advantage of the increased depreciation, then we're going to be bringing a mechanism to you that will make that roadway cost affordable to them through credits. And finally, the board, if the board really decided that that one segment From Tyndall down to Kiefer. Isn't necessary. And if you had an updated traffic analysis from

2:06:47your staff that say, hey, for the reasons that that you said Commissioner Mariano, it's only half mile east to that next road. It's only half mile west to the other road. Given the way the actual development density plays out here, you might determine that you don't really need anyone to build that particular link that is problematic because of the location of the houses. And you simply remove that link from the roadway requirement. So there There are a lot of ways to skin this cat. That

2:07:17address the problem short of not approving the Plazinski's MPUD. in the basic form that you've approved the 15 others out there. So in closing, we urge you to please Please approve theirs on the staff recommended conditions. And if the prerogative of the majority of the board is you don't want Peachtree Lane opened up, you want that to be emergency only, we certainly acknowledge that the VOPH committee. that that we

2:07:47would do whatever is the board's prerogative. Thank you.

2:07:51Madam Chairman M

2:07:52Yeah.

2:07:53So I asked him to put the map up to show the road.

2:07:59So just think about this. providing these lines are right now I have no reason to think they're not. So the edge of the road or the very northern one. The house is right on the edge of the roadway. The next one right beside the roadway. Down a glass brenner, right on the edge of the roadway. Then right beside the roadway. Then what it's now done the shift over to accommodate for the school. It then goes on the other side of the house at the bottom of that other parcel. If development's gonna come in. The way it's set right now if any one

2:08:29of these four parcels, which could be subdivided and kind of broken up, whatever may happen with family members. Any one of those four parcels would keep any more development coming in there. So if they do want to get the densities they're talking about getting This here would get shattered to the Now the way to make it happen, as well as put a buffer in place Until that does happen, which Yeah. Decide it's not coming, if you do shift the road over the thirty five feet. You give yourself a bit more room. To maybe make it more viable. To

2:09:00make it work.

2:09:02Well, what I'm struggling with is that and I didn't know how the road network works and I I don't understand. That and I and I believe this road grid is very important. Um, especially when we're putting all the density in V OPH, and I'm a big fan of VOPH. I don't understand why the road network cost isn't shared by everybody. I I am struggling with um say Mr. Mr. Glass Brenners.

2:09:33I think we're taking the value of his property. Um so because of the way the road is is financed. That's my only issue here. So I'm gonna ask the applicant, you wanna Shall we continue this?

2:09:49Madam Chair.

2:09:50Or does someone want to make a motion or

2:09:52Madam Chair?

2:09:53Yeah.

2:09:54Is the school south of Kiefer Road? Yes,

2:09:57it's under construction.

2:09:59Yeah, but it's all south of Kiefer Road. So why can't we just move the road back to straight vertical north and south and then shift it? a little to the west, so they do share it.

2:10:11Yeah, I I d I don't really understand what's going on there with the school district.

2:10:17But that but I have a skin a bigger skin.

2:10:21L idea for that 'cause I and I just learned this yesterday with the applicant.

2:10:24If you don't need the

2:10:25to the north of Tyndall going across That's where that road alignment goes in, that road resear so it actually does line up with it. But just like we have other intersections, shifting at thirty five feet, I don't think is gonna affect it. In a negative way whatsoever. And add buffer until until it goes. So maybe that density that is heavy all around the areas, but not in this little area. it'd be more palatable for everybody surrounded as well. It actually solves two th two things.

2:10:54Let me chair. There was a comment made about I don't know if it was Commissioner Oakley or not. of keeping that one is emergency access, which are the applicants that they're willing to do as well.

2:11:05What's part of the requirement? Well that's I think think that should be done. That's that's only reasonable. That's a concern, no wood acres. They don't want eventually that'd be opened up and traffic go through it all the time. But I

2:11:16don't think we're gonna get to the road things unless they're willing to make some concessions right now.

2:11:20So Commissioner Mariano, you are suggesting to do what?

2:11:27Elon?

2:11:27I don't understand which direction you're wanting to shift Elon. Well you can't do that because that violates your master roadway plan. So if you want to do that, you've got an ordinance amendment process to move that road, number one. And and that's okay, we

2:11:43can do that.

2:11:44Well, you can do that in a separate proceeding. Correct. Okay, but my point is this MPUD's entitled to to be processed under the current plan. That's point number one. Point number two is you have the people on the east side where that alignment is standing here telling you under oath. That they're not going to develop their property. They don't want to develop their property. So why would you then force the road on the parcel that does want to sell and develop, impede the whole plan of VOPH?

2:12:15You're going to punish the people that want to invoke VOPH. Now, when we approve VOPH, All of these arguments are hearing today, we've known for 12 and 14 years you would have them. We have them every time we have an application in VOPH. And the rule we said was: look, this is an opt-in arrangement. It's an overlay. If you don't want to avail yourself of your density, you're entitled to keep exactly what you have, do nothing. Enjoy that. We

2:12:46are doing nothing to those people today other than that. If they want to keep what they have, and if they do not want Elam Road through their property, they simply have to do what they swore under oath they intend to do. The flip side of that is we promised everyone that those of you who want this density, you have the legal right to opt into this plan. And the Plazuwski's have invoked that right based upon the current plan. And how can we possibly deny them the right of doing what you've allowed 15 or 18

2:13:16other properties to do? Um, we're gonna you're gonna have these objections you will have on every VOPH approval. You will never have a village built, you will never fulfill the plan that you were so proud you won all these national and state awards for, because if every objection from someone who lives in VOPH stops a development or makes it undevelopable due to cost, you're not gonna have a plan.

2:13:43Joe, I agree. I mean I don't know what else to say. But let me um so this con this concept that we're bringing a change that these roads are what I don't understand is why aren't these roads why weren't these impact don't leave or someone why weren't these roads impact fee creditable from the beginning?

2:14:00Right from the beginning. We were trying to make it cost affordable so that it would work and not scare everyone off. So what we did is we put all the primary road roads in this $400 million budget. We put 20% of these intermediate roads, just making an estimate that you would have some. Let me back up. You have some large projects. We brought in to use some really large projects. Large, hundreds of acres, thousands of units, those can afford

2:14:31to absorb the cost of the internal intermediate road as long as they're getting credits for the primary. So it worked there. We made a calculated guess that among these small parcels, we would have perhaps about 20% of the development parcels that would be so small that they had exactly. This issue. That we've identified today. And this issue now, again, is only if the parcels on the east decide to develop, but if they were to develop. We're

2:15:01now seeing that we're getting enough traction and market prices are rising. Rising prices float all boats, and we've now determined in the development community that we think we can up that ante, that we now have enough interest. There are eight or ten parcels under contract and an active construction permitted out there. So there's now enough market momentum. We said, oh. Okay, nail's the time while we have traction and the market appetite for it. Let's go ahead and put

2:15:31that other 80% into that budget because we think the market will absorb it, and let's spread that over the cost of the entire project. So the short answer is we are going to fix exactly the issue that you've identified. And we had that meeting with Ernie and David and Mr. Biles probably four or five months ago. And we've we've had detailed discussions on how financially we think that can make that happen. So if you will bear with us. I promise you that in

2:16:01the next few months, we're going to have an alternative in front of you that hopefully you can get comfortable with. If not, you can change it. And like I said, you can still change that roadmap. If you're correct, you can either remove the link. They also can move it within their own property if they decide to develop. But please don't deny the approval for these landowners. you know for their legacy when they are doing they're doing exactly what your plan tells them they are to do. Now

2:16:32that buffer on the east side uh Commissioner Moore that 20 foot buffer the code requires it's a landscape buffer we're happy to do that to shield them we're not we're not going to be unreasonable neighbors

2:16:45What about um a fence along the backyards of those houses?

2:16:50Sure, you want a fence down that eastern boundary? Is that a and the twenty foot buffer?

2:16:55Uh in that In that one section right there. I don't think you need to fence the lake. But I'm still trying to wrap my hands around so okay. I appreciate that the gentlemen who have these lovely homes say they're not gonna sell. But they're not gonna be here forever. And I've nope, you cannot talk from there. Um and so so um

2:17:26When the next generation if if they're pa if if they go to sell or they hand it to their family, I mean who who's to s who's to say their family they have family members that wanna come live? live there. So I don't think we can base our decisions that someone uh is never gonna sell. I don't. Um so for me then the question is, especially for Mr Glassburn or not so much for Mr. Lane or that that parcel Uh Have

2:17:56we?

2:18:02Anyone who buys that property. It's gonna have the burden. of that road if they want to develop it. So we've take to me, we've taken we might have taken some value from him. Is that fair? So I I really feel that that other others have to share in the cost of the road. So I Ernie, I hope you're fixing that. Yeah.

2:18:22And if you do have an area that you want fenced on the eastern boundary, just show us what that what that line is. Yeah, that

2:18:29I'm you know, I I am for V O P H I am for the density. Name this up. And adjust Want to be careful we're not taking property. Property

2:18:40Well some

2:18:40of these

2:18:41property owners bought after the V H O P H plan was adopted.

2:18:45And I I'm not saying that.

2:18:48Okay.

2:18:50Commissioner Oakley. The Road that you're talking about, you're talking about somebody's gonna get hell. responsible to build that road, that's actually gonna be taken care of within villages of Pasadena Hills. Well they're saying they're working on it.

2:19:04That's what I'm hearing that the reporting.

2:19:06They have to change it.

2:19:09So if this board wants to build that, they're gonna have to condemn it. I mean, exactly. That's what's gonna happen. I if V O P H does it. It's

2:19:24An acquisition to For their entitlements, really. Mean 'cause that Because Without Elam.

2:19:35They're not going to get to their maximum entitlements. And so if you talk about taking it off That's gonna that's gonna

2:19:44I think the network's important.

2:19:46That that's gonna take their entitlements away from them, basically. So

2:19:51I

2:19:51mean,

2:19:52or the county's gonna have to pitch in more if we feel that road backwards important. Ernie

2:19:57can speak to PDD, but my understanding of the discussions with Ernie and David and Mr. Biles is PDD and the V O P H stakeholders are in lockstep with this, that they're willing to amend that budget and add that cost for all intermediate roads to address the issue. people the only people the only people that will result in that not being done is if three or more of you vote no. Because we are going to have that proposal in front of you for you to approve. And obviously

2:20:27it's your power. uh to do that. But I the roadway issue, in my judgment, we need to address through that process and not deny an individual zoning that meets the requirements of your current plan. That's all I implore you to do. We we always get in trouble when we change and make up rules on the fly in an individual matter, as opposed to addressing it as a global solution so that there's a level Playing field. And everybody has to do the same thing from that point forward. That's all

2:20:57I beg you to do.

2:20:59Madam

2:20:59Clerk.

2:21:00Yep.

2:21:00And this is the this is that we gotta wrap this up.

2:21:07If we were to draw this holistically and and look at look at where this line was gonna go. My first question seeing this thing. Is why is the roadway always next to the oh to the property to the side. Why isn't it shared between the two? When the two could pretty much line up. So why would one go all the way to the other?

2:21:26Strikes me. When I look at the houses that are put on there. Would you design a road that way if you were gonna like set this whole thing up and and put a road right next to those homes? Or would you have shifted it over to the side? This was shifted once before. It can be shifted again. And granted we can't do it today. And if it takes time to get it right, I'd rather take the time and get it right. Look at it, look at even down the bottom of the Skinner property. They're driving the road right through the home.

2:21:53It's it's like a it's like a tornado.

2:21:55You know, and house, house,

2:21:56house, house, house.

2:21:57We would we wouldn't we wouldn't do this. So we can do a lot better, I think, by looking at this and readjusting. And keep in mind, this parcel right here used to be on the edge. It's now in the general which gives it more density. So I don't mind working the density part. But I think that roadway part

2:22:17to make these densities come in later on down the road, it's gonna be a lot eas easier for the next generations coming in if that roadway is not right on top of these homes. They still might want to keep their homes And do some other things out there. But Having to take these homes? We wouldn't do that. Oh well we're not. But we're gonna keep the road from getting built. Which later on for Mr. Starkey we could be in a situation like we're up in Hudson. Where I have that vision road that connects from Denton. Down to Hicks Road at fifty two. And I've got that one section that runs

2:22:47from Bolton to the Bayonet Point. That runs from New York Avenue to Bolton that we haven't connected. And until the development is interconnected, that road's still sitting there right now. I don't care.

2:22:57Yes, Mr. Oakley.

2:22:58I'd like to I don't see a lot of consent from the one among the board. And I'd like to uh continue this project to I don't know if you can do a time certain but so that staff and all can get with each and every one of us and The applicant can so we can solve these issues. So when it comes to us we don't have all these kind of questions up in the air, who's gonna do what or You know, cause this is an owner trying to do this. This is not the developer that's gonna build it. And

2:23:29it makes it a little hard to Work someone that's he's building it to sell somebody. So

2:23:35Well if you have a second. I have a second.

2:23:37So

2:23:39So your Dade City meeting for February is the eighth, if that's sufficient time.

2:23:45I don't think so. I think it should be the next one.

2:23:50March. Yeah, um

2:23:54March Also on my calendar is showing the eighth. As your date as your date is March eight. So would the can continuance would to be until March eighth at one thirty or soon there after it's second remotion.

2:24:09Yes.

2:24:11All right, any more discussion? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay, that was five. Thank you very much. Um I think we're gonna take a five minute break and then we'll come back for our last public hearing.