Substantial Modification (Consent) – Riverstone (Renner) MPUD – KB Homes Tampa LLC – Substantial Modification to Allow the Developer to Receive Certificates of Occupancy for 98 Homes Prior to Completion of Road Improvements Through Modification of a Previously Approved Condition to Rename the Renner MPUD to Riverstone MPUD

32:20Sure, William Vermillion Planning Development Economic Growth. I'll take us quickly to The uh To the cross section here.

32:32For the record on P41, we have proof of publication July 23rd, 2025, supplemented by affidavit of certified mailings and site positions. Thank you.

32:43Sure. So th this twelve foot multi-use path is gonna run the extent of the roadway segment that the applicant is charged with building under this uh this development agreement, which is from their project access all the way north to the existing town home d development to the north where pedestrian facilities are constructed along Westerial Loop.

33:05Okay, so my question was what is the vision for the continuation of this multi use path? uh on Bexley because it's already built on part of Bexley. So w is it on the north side or is it on the south side as we continue west? And my other question was in the drawings that are in the packet Um It stops before the entrance to the subdivision, so I was confused.

33:32Sure. So

33:33you could go to the one that has the red and the yellow and the blue.

33:37Of the uh the exhibit packet of the development

33:39agreement.

33:40See.

33:42It has the trail on it's in forty one, not forty. I learned that yesterday.

33:46Okay, we may need to wait a minute to have those pulled up um from the agenda packet. It wa it is a little confuse.

33:55It is a little confusing with the there's three different segments, A, B, and C. So there's an actual exhibit B Which highlights that the typical section which I showed within my

34:04PowerPoint

34:06is going to run the full length which would include that multi use

34:09trail.

34:11I'm more concerned about section C and I I'd like to see it up there. Because on your map it stops before it gets to the entrance of the subdivision, so I'm confused. And it's on the other side of the street. So I I just want to know. Is this multi use path? Because I think in Bexley I know, I I just want to see how this connects to the Bexley multi-use path and is it and I asked this in my meeting yesterday that I gave forewarning I was gonna ask this

34:41question today.

34:42Sure.

34:43What is the future alignment of that path heading west?

34:51Sorry. It's actually it's in the this is the MP, it's actually in the development agreement. The exhibits. They're exhibits to the development agreement.

35:00It's uh page page thirteen of fourteen.

35:09So you're you're at it's what it I believe it's Arden Preserve is the development there to the north on

35:20On your drawing it doesn't go to the entrance.

35:29It just goes to the corner of the property.

35:33Sure. So I did uh Respond to this uh yesterday this question was asked of me and if this doesn't clarify um your question Then we'll we'll talk about this exhibit as Gina's pulling it up.

35:46Wait, you want me to look up those legal things? He's just gonna read you

35:50some

35:50stuff

35:51that he's pulled up. Gina's gonna pull

35:52the

35:52right-of-way. Just so we can have a visual exhibit up here of the three segments. Um the I I the multi-use path does not stop along the eastern boundary and the multi-use path runs the entirety of the northern segment of the roadway that the applicant's responsible for constructing. This is the the same commitment and typical section of roadway that was previously approved by the last development agreement which the board approved last year in twenty twenty four. The multi-use path will cross.

36:19Can you blow that one up?

36:20Yep. That one there. Yeah, you'll

36:22have to turn it

36:22clock once.

36:24Okay, where's the entrance to that subdivision?

36:35Yeah, yeah. And you know, I right or wrong, I'm just curious why It doesn't go to the entrance of the subdivision.

36:45So there is an existing past the entrance of the subdivision, there's existing pedestrian facilities that this does connect to. So even though this multi-use path doesn't go to the entrance, if we were to pull up the aerial on Pasco Mapper Arden Preserve was required to build pedestrian facilities within the right-of-way along the frontage of their project, which this segment is connecting to with their pedestrian facilities. There's a currently a five foot sidewalk along Arden.

37:14Well that's not a multi use path.

37:16No, no, it's not on Arden, but I

37:18But where's Arden in uh Arden Wait, wait a minute?

37:21So Arden is the development to the north of the M.

37:25I'm talking about the other way. I'm sorry.

37:27Oh

37:28I'm talking about the blue section. Section A.

37:32Okay, so the the blue section is still also.

37:38Right.

37:38So Renner

37:39Renner is the M PD that's

37:40that's already built.

37:41Yeah, this is the one that's building it. There will be twelve feet along that blue section as well.

37:46Okay, so at Renner, um this goes to their entrance? Because it's not going across their whole front and so I'm wondering why

37:55it is going to their entrance, yes ma'am.

37:56But it's not covering the rest of their project. So who's gonna be responsible for that multi use trail that we go to their project boundary on the west?

38:06Theoretically that would be development that comes in in the future within that vacant piece of land would be responsible for then the improvements of uh Bexley and Wisteria loop. So they would be responsible

38:17much

38:18like this

38:19project was responsible. um go to the why did they not have to construct it? I think Bexley is an arterial or a um whatever road, right? Collector. Collector. Which requires the developer to either put a sidewalk or a multi use trail in front of their project. It looks to me like we're stopping Halfway through their project. So I just I didn't understand that.

38:44A a little bit of the rationale too is how much further off side improvements that they're doing Uh.

38:50They could have done it on their own property that they're buying.

38:53Right, but they're they're connecting all the way up to Arden Preserve and realigning the road for

38:56us. How about going the other way?

38:57No, I I know I'm saying that's part of the rationale for for this development agreement is the other infrastructure improvements that they're doing off site. The the C S X line um that you can see over to the left side of the page really prevents Bexley Roadway um from being improved past the CSX line just because it needs to be an above grade crossing at this point.

39:24Well, I I just don't understand why it didn't go across their whole front.

39:39Yeah, yeah. So I mean the board's kind of already. Yes, the cart has left the

39:45the horse has left the

39:46barn. Correct.

39:47I think we messed up, not requiring them to the case. there was

39:50substantial board debate on this one. Um

39:53Well we we we did over by um Ray Gad's house and the sheriff's house. But I thought our code required them to put something in front of their development, either a sidewalk or multi use path.

40:05It could have been part of the agreement. I I don't know, you know, when we make agreements with developers sometimes

40:12Again I'd have to go back and check the record on it, but this is what's codified in the agreement and again what's before you really is uh allowing them to have the additional COs and thus accepting a performance bond to ensure that the requ uh the what the board required at the time gets built.

40:30And for the case. Do we have a clear Landershire? Yeah. Do we have a clearer map to show exactly what's gonna be built in?

40:38Would you like the the GIS aerial to be pulled up? Would that be more clear or would you like the master plan of the subject? Oh the master plan, please. So if if we actually go to Mapper, uh some of these units are already platted, so it's even easier to see Excellent. On GIS than the master plan, which previously didn't have platted lots.

41:04Right, so that there's that that context map actually shows the the plats there.

41:13We can I can't see what's in front though, can you? Now

41:16on this line is it going further to the west than what you're showing on the other one?

41:26Oh i i if you'll just pull up that context map that was on the PowerPoint and zoom into that.

41:35So that's the the actual plat of the neighborhood currently.

41:39Oh. I I don't think the trail's even on this thing.

41:42No, no, th this is just an aerial map to to show the the lot lines in the area.

41:48But this gives you an idea of what the neighborhood looks like because it's already platted with its internal streets.

41:56Madam Chairman Mari we need a better description. If if it's just stops at their entrance, that's not a good thing, especially 'cause the people to the side may not develop. There's only a slid of sliver there.

42:06I know, I don't understand how the how our

42:08Bexley Road, Wisteria Trail, and then down the road you get the extension may go under. I mean We gotta we gotta get this finished.

42:16That I think that's

42:17this is a hundred and eight units, you've already approved it. This is changing the timing of of a requirement. So I'm not

42:29All right, let me ask this way. Is there is there right away there for us to come in and continue that? Was it preserved?

42:37I can't answer that for you. I have to ask constaffant.

42:41Uh along this property, yes, we have right away, but there's not sufficient right away as you move Is that further west, uh the development that came in would be responsible for dedicating the right of way there.

42:54So did so do we have it on their side?

42:57On

42:59I mean the trail can cross the street.

43:03Wh wh which side are when you say this side, which side are you talking? So

43:06the south side.

43:07Yeah, so we'd need right-of-way on on both sides if it's not within the subject property or within the confines of this development agreement. If you were moving towards the C S X line.

43:19Do we have dedicated right-of-way on the south side of the road to continue a multi use trail? Where after they stop.

43:28On the applicant's property?

43:31Yes. The this project gave sufficient right away as a part of their M P D conditions.

43:37They're just not constructing the path to the end of their problem.

43:41I I I I want the applicant to confirm that.

43:46Yeah there. Sorry.

43:50'Cause I I saw what happened on that other road in Land O' Lakes and Two two neighborhoods.

43:57Thank you. Shelley Johnson, [address removed], and I have been sworn. Just to provide a little bit of further background, we already have the county permits for this improvement project. The county is the actual applicant for the 404 permitting, to which they've already started that process as well. So the actual design has been approved. It's you know, engineered or pr you know, we're th they're we're really far along in terms of changing you know, how far the path would go west. As far no no we don't we did what we were told.

44:27I mean typically what you see with these MPDs, I don't um you know, there's a variety of different roads I can think of where You know, they go from one entrance to the next entrance in terms of what they're building that segment of that roadway improvement. This is exactly what this one did. It actually got a bigger segment heading east, obviously. But that multi-use trail goes from it's on the north side, it goes from the entrance all the way to the Arden Preserve existing sidewalk because Arden Preserve is already built. We have to fix that. Yeah. The south side, they took the sidewalk all the way across or you know. all the

44:57way from their entrance all the way to tie into the existing tie in of the road improvement. Um you know where the the realignment then ties into the existing alignment. So they've done everything that they've

45:07asked to do as far as there. Um at if you go out the entrance and you turn left, there's a sidewalk on the south side now. They have constructed a sidewalk on the south side.

45:18I do not know what their plat showed if they put a sidewalk on the side. They have dedicated

45:24all of the right away that they were required to re and dedicate under the corridor maps and then the and the MPD approval for sure.

45:33I know they I know that's a good thing. Div. All that engineering is done. if we preserved enough to continue, that's all. On that side, because it gets very narrow on the north side. You can see that that w wetland and lake or whatever's there, so the the trail would And this is why I was asking staff what is the vision for that to continue to the West? Because it really has to cross the street.

45:58The only information I have about that is of course there at some point they don't control the right-of-way head in West anymore, but my understanding is there's there's missing right-of-way segments for that segment of the Bexley extension and you know there's no P D and E's or anything like that. So I think as they you know plan in the future and make that connection where there's that gap, then hope you know obviously they they will account for the multi-use path because obviously this has you know created a nice spot for him to do it on the north side. Um I I don't I don't believe there's any plans or anything. I don't know if anybody from the staff knows.

46:28So so let me ask you again, Shelley, sorry, looking at this. Is there a sidewalk? built to the left to the west of your entrance in front of your project.

46:40I'm looking at my client because I honestly I don't know because when I've gone out there I've never really paid attention. That probably was looking at the other side of it. So

46:50Andy Greenwood.

46:53I can show you the Google Earth image of the sidewalk.

47:00Yeah.

47:02It's

47:02there.

47:03You wanna put put his phone over there then?

47:06Isn't that the same im image if it's Google?

47:09I think he has a photograph.

47:13She's speaking to the west there. She wants to know are there any pedestrian facilities to the west or to the east. So no, there are not.

47:19Do we know if the right-of-way is there? That's the biggest question.

47:21Yeah, so do we have the right-of-way preserved from you guys? Click on those triangles. And why didn't we ask of a sidewalk down from the easy one?

47:30This is a this is a platted subdivision. Um we've dedicated all right-of-way as necessary for the

47:36zoning conditions. Y y I know what you're saying, but I'm click I'm saying no. See that triangle towards the easy house. You've got a sidewalk in front of your project to the right, but you didn't do it on the left.

47:46I I I understand. I I do want to ask though that we are not I mean I didn't anticipate. Yes.

47:54We're not changing we're not changing we're not I'm not asking you to change anything. Okay, I just wanted to address we messed up.

48:01So that you're showing right now we have the right-of-way in front? Yeah. That was the biggest concern. And I and I want to say these guys did a great job working with us, building in front of two other pieces of properties that didn't get done to make it happen, and it took a major thing to get the approvals done.

48:16Well

48:16they're not done with that yet.

48:18No, I know, but but but I mean that's that's why we're giving them extensions so they can keep on building. So the your I think your concerns and our concerns, we have the right-way when can they get ready to get the connection? That was my question. We'll make the connection happen. So I'm gonna

48:29because we can't go do it on it'd be very hard to do it on the other side.

48:33That's why they did such a great job making

48:34it

48:34happen on the other side. We really needed those connections.

48:37When you do the multi-use path. on the north side is gonna need to be it's gonna need to cross the street and continue on the south side in my opinion. But I am not the active transportation planner. Um Yes.

48:51Good afternoon board. Um Chair David Allen, Assistant Administrator for Development Services. And so I think this is a really good picture because the a couple of things. Number one was was as as we met yesterday and had the conversation, the exhibit that we had. Showed the multi-use path on the north side stopping right at their

49:09entrance.

49:10No, it

49:11was

49:11actually shown at uh on their easterly project boundary, right?

49:15Yeah.

49:15And so what what they've agreed to do is build that all the way up to their entrance. Um and so the idea here was that they would have continuity from that point moving easterly all the way over to the other side. So that's why we didn't have them Build The westerly portion is because they had a lot of off-site improvements in order to make this project move forward. So um to everybody else's point, I think yes, we do have the right-of-way um dedicated for that and we'll be looking at whether there are other projects that move

49:45forward that would c complete that construction or the county would contribute to building out the

49:51process. That was my question.

49:52Yeah. So good question. I hope that

49:53provides clear Yeah, we got it now. So. Okay. Um this is a public hearing. Did anyone else uh wish to speak to this item? Again.

50:06Seeing

50:06no one move approval.

50:08Second.

50:08Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. All right. Um we are two commissioner items.

50:17Okay.