An Ordinance By The Pasco County Board Of County Commissioners Amending The Pasco County Land Development Code; Amending Section 802 Tree Preservation And Replacement; Section 802.1 Intent And Purpose; Section 802.2 Applicability; Section 802.3 Tree Removal; Creating Section 802.4 New Development; Section 802.5 Existing Problem Trees; Section 802.6 Tree Protection; Section 802.7 Trees Of Special Significance; Section 802.8 Heritage Trees; Section 802.9 Tree Mitigation Fund; Appendix A Definitions; And Other Sections, As Necessary, For Internal Consistency; Providing For Applicability; Repealer; Providing For Severability; Inclusion Into The Land Development Code, And An Effective Date.

2:15:49Okay, so our last item for today's public hearing is item PC five. That's PDE twenty-five zero zero zero seven.

2:16:00County Board of County Commissioners, amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section eight oh two, tree preservation and replacement, Section 802.1, intent and purpose, Section 802.2, applicability, Section 802.3, tree removal, grading section 802.1 for new development, section eight oh two point five, existing problem trees, section eight oh two point six Tree Protection,

2:16:31Section 802.7, Trees of Special Significance, Section 802.8, Heritage Trees, Section 802.9, Tree Mitigation Fund, Appendix A Definitions, and other sections as necessary for internal consistency. Providing for applicability, repealer, providing for severability, inclusion into the land development code, and an effective date.

2:16:58Thank you.

2:17:00That was a multiple. Amanda Hill, Planning Development, Economic Growth. Good afternoon. So I would like to just state for the record that there are some public comments and expertise communications received by staff regarding this item and those have been sent to the clerk's office. I'd also like to clarify the efforts. I know David started that discussion a little earlier on when he was responding to the citizen. But essentially there are three separate things that are happening right now regarding trees. There's

2:17:30a tree mitigation fund resolution that was approved by the board on July 15th. There is the minor land development code amendment that's currently happening. This is the one that's uh in front of you right now for consideration, and that's to address inconsistencies and put the change of contribution rate into effect. And then there's a substantive revision that's currently happening right now. Uh staff is working on the draft, coordinating with internal and external stakeholders, and the intent is to bring that to you in November. So

2:18:01that's just setting the feel for what we're discussing today.

2:18:06So just to recap, over the last few months there have been a couple different activities regarding trees. There was an LPA workshop at the June 5th meeting. Uh like I mentioned before, on July 15th, the board approved resolution number 25-291, which clarifies the use of funds, administration, and increases the contribution rates to the tree mitigation fund. On August 7th, there was another LPA workshop regarding trees. On August 21st, the

2:18:36LDC amendment was brought to the Local Planning Agency for consideration, where it was continued to today's date. And specifically, the LPA wanted to provide sufficient time for the TBBA to meet with the board regarding the approved resolution 25-291. and to discuss its potential implications. And as such, the discussion occurred and the board and TBPA ultimately discussed changing the cap for the contribution rate. So

2:19:07the draft that was approved by the board at the 750 meeting did not include a CAP, and this was discussed at the 821 meeting that we had with the LPA. We are now drafting an amended resolution that will include a cap of $3,500 per upland developable acre. The intent is to bring this amended resolution to the board for consideration at the 1021 meeting.

2:19:34Just as a recap as well, these were the rates that were approved by the board in that resolution in July. And of note is that the effective date of section one contribution rates will be upon the repeal of section 802.3C1B3A to D of the LDC. So, as such, the purpose of this amendment is to remove the contribution rates that are currently referenced in that section of the code. and to remove the purpose

2:20:04and authorized locations that are referenced in that section of the code as well. And this would resolve the internal inconsistency that's currently in the code regarding this matter.

2:20:16And staff finds the proposed amendment consistent with a comprehensive plan and recommends to the l LPA. to find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan. I'm here for any questions that you may have.

2:20:28Thank you, Haven. Uh Mr. Chair, just for the record, I want to thank the TBBA for participating in our exchange and dialogue. Um we had three things on the table when we uh started our final negotiations and meeting with the board members. One was the cap because they wanted to control their financial exposure. Number two was Uh grandfathering in certain applications and number three, uh phasing in the fees over a period of three years. And in our negotiations they backed off on two

2:20:58and three and they found that the thirty five hundred dollar cap was very important to them. And uh I didn't I didn't meet with all the board members, but there is a consensus of the ones I met with, which is a Which is three, that uh they're they were in agreement.

2:21:13Yeah.

2:21:14Thank you.

2:21:15Thank you very much.

2:21:19Any questions? So there won't be any grandfathering? They backed off on the grandfathering and so

2:21:24No they did they did because and and one of the reasons was valid and uh we really appreciate their consideration. We've had lower two our fees have been too low for over a decade. So you know, we w You know, if they went into another county with uh updated fees, they'd be paying immediately. So these tree mitigation fees are paid at the uh be prior to the site plan or land development permitting.

2:21:46Good.

2:21:49Anything else? What we hear from the public?

2:21:51No, I

2:21:52mean

2:21:52I I guess just kind of expanding on that a little bit, David, though I mean it it It does not seem fair that somebody took on a big project And uh is a year into the process, but just because that's those fees haven't they haven't been told what those fees are and they're not due to be paid yet, that all of a sudden they get hit with a different fee. That just seems odd to me. I've never seen the county do anything like that before.

2:22:15Well that's true in large MPUDs. it takes a matter of years to get all the site development permitting out the door. we didn't even consider that and we didn't have that discussion with the T B B A about it. Um Certainly if they had mass grading, which is constitutes a permit, you know, that would help them out. But in areas they that are virgin, even though they have the zoning entitlement, they you know, under the way that the ordinance is drafted, they would have to pay the fees.

2:22:42I mean um theoretically, I mean you you could have you could have a project that's literally uh it's addressing round two comments today. This gets approved by the board in in couple weeks, and all of a sudden they get hit with new fees and they've been in review for six or eight months just on a simple site plan.

2:22:56Well we have the T B B A saying, Hey, when are we gonna get this cap imposed?

2:23:03Well they're only builders actually. They're they're home builders. I

2:23:06mean, they don't do any commercial development. They build residential subdivisions.

2:23:13I I do appreciate the I mean the the cap is is a was a big thing. I I agree with that. I mean I I can see why that was most important to them, but I still just don't I mean I just have heartburn with that precedent being set that all of a sudden we're gonna yank the rug out for people.

2:23:27Well, you know, we have we have to start I understand. I mean our view is we have to start

2:23:32somewhere. If you change if you change any other uh the county's position has always been anytime since I've been involved, if your application was in that's kind of what the the s Your application was in, then you go if it's not in yet, then you go to the new ordinance.

2:23:46Well you could make a conditional recommendation based on that, if you'd like, if the commission would like.

2:23:52Yeah, I'd uh very good. I appreciate it.

2:23:55One of the discussions we had though was Having the fees in the ordinance not just being adopted by resolution. Part of the problem that I have with that, and it's not a problem with the five current commissioners I have. They're reasonable people and they're they're business people and they're They're well thought and reasoned. But I may get a commission in the future. That just decides, you know what? I don't think these fees are low

2:24:25enough. It says $75 an inch, let's make them $750 an inch. And they can go in. And have a resolution prepared. Have it on the consent agenda like this resolution was. with no public hearing, And you can have the rules changed in the middle of the game. Without any due process.

2:24:52And I think that's why it's important that the fee schedule needs to be in the ordinance. And maybe from time to time we'll have to update the ordinance with the fee schedule, but then at least we have public hearing and we get to have the people like the T B B A and the ICSC or whoever come in here and talk to us about the fees and whether they're reasonable or whether CAP should be there. And I'm not opposed to raising the fee. Smooth. I'm opposed to the method by which we're by which we're raising the fees. I think there

2:25:23needs to be due process. And I don't particularly find that consistent that not having due process consistent with our own comprehensive plan. Our comprehensive plan has property rights element as well. that says we will consider the Burt Harris Act. And

2:25:45in the Burt Harris Act. is a property owner's bill of rights. And number five in that Bill of Rights is the right to due process.

2:25:57I don't think it's unreasonable for us to hold public hearings. The board has the ultimate decision and they can raise them to whatever they want. What I'm asking is that they do that. and allow property owners To have due process. When you do it by resolution that can be done on the consent agenda without a public hearing, that's not due process.

2:26:21So Mr. Moody, what you're saying is because the current L P L Land Development Code requires the fees to be set by resolution, we should amend that provision and then have the fees in the ordinance and sort of goes through a public hearing. Okay.

2:26:35And again, I it's not that I'm worried about the five sitting commissioners we have there. Like that they're logical people. I'm not worried about them doing something. But you know, the political pendulum swings over time. And I don't know who we're gonna have. Five years or ten years from now and they could decide, yeah, well let's make it a thousand dollars an inch. Or maybe we get a The opposite. Let's just make it zero dollars an inch. Yeah. Uh there needs to be there needs to be a process by which

2:27:05the public can come and speak and the the stakeholders can come and speak. More than just a resolution.

2:27:13And I did want to add some additional context, not necessarily for against what you were just mentioning, but um I note that uh Mr. Olstein mentioned at the last uh hearing that back in 2005 the fee was changed by resolution. I did some additional research and I went back to the 2001 ordinance that was done that actually put the tree mitigation tree protection ordinance into the LDC. And um even in that version back in 01, uh it said here the rate shall be held a hundred thousand a hundred dollars per inch, two hundred

2:27:43for each two inch caliper tree, which rate may be amended from time to time by resolution of the board. So it's been a longstanding requirement within this that it's adopted by resolution, whether it goes up or down.

2:27:56I understand.

2:28:00Right. High. feel like people have the right to due process. Especially

2:28:05when money's

2:28:05concerned. And one of the things I've been very since I've been back on this board, one of the things I've been very consistent about since the day I've been here is the people's right to speak, that they get due process. I don't necessarily have to agree with everything that's said and people don't have to agree with everything that I say, but everybody gets their right to speak. And they don't want to have a situation where As Jamie's pointed out, the rules can be changed in the middle of the game with no notice.

2:28:38I agree. Okay, so I think we've identified that that's an important factor in uh And what we want to see in that ordinance, so

2:28:48I think David you've encapsulated what we've talked about and

2:28:51Yes, sir. Um I recommend because of timeliness and well everybody wants to get this thing taken care of. Yeah. If you could recommend it to the board with conditions and revision requests, uh we would carry it forth earnestly for you. Okay. Well

2:29:05when can I ask a question?

2:29:07Yes sir.

2:29:08When is the rest of the tree ordinance gonna be ready for us. It I I don't feel like it's proper to adopt a tree ordinance piecemeal.

2:29:19This isn't this

2:29:20to get this thing in in the hole.

2:29:22This just deals with the tree mitigation fees. It doesn't

2:29:24deal with the ordinance. I understand. We won't have it to you until November.

2:29:35Some fire that's gonna be put out tomorrow afternoon by raising the fees. And the comment's been made in multiple hearings that the reason that the trees are cut down is because the fees are too low. Well, I tell you guys to go Google this 'cause they just did. that the rate of inflation since two thousand eleven since this ordinance was passed, is almost Fifty percent in total. A dollar a dollar in twenty eleven is a dollar fi almost a dollar fifty

2:30:05today. So we're gonna raise the fees fifty percent. Which that's keeping up with the times. But the the assertion is that the fee way back then wasn't high enough and that's why the trees were killed. Well, no, the trees the fee's about the same. The fees when you look at it in dollars adjusted for inflation was about the same. And I've said this before, and this is why I'd like you to bring this back in the hole. Fees for trees doesn't save trees. These people sitting behind you wouldn't

2:30:35be here today There's been lots of fees collected and they've got a giant tree mitigation fund and I uh and I appreciate that they're gonna open the spigot up and let some of these trees p be planted. It's a good thing. But fees for trees hasn't been an approach that works. And unless you wanna make it even higher, 'cause we're basically just readjusting the fee for inflation. I don't feel like it's gonna do anything. But one of the things that happened in the workshop was you showed us that Alachua

2:31:06County requires maintaining twenty per cent of the canopy, you shall retain twenty per cent of the trees. That saves trees. that you shall save those trees, that that w that will guarantee that the trees are saved.

2:31:21fees, I can just pass those on. I'll just pass those on to the purchaser of the property. No different than when you want to raise impact fees. Who pays those? The builder doesn't need them. The home purchaser eats them. And they're gonna eat the fees for the trees. So I don't think this approach works. And we need to reconsider that approach. It hasn't worked. and we've got nothing to show anywhere else that it works.

2:31:50Again, I'm not opposed to raising the fee. That's keeping it up for inflation. I hope we do that with some due process. But it's an approach that I don't believe is going to bring yield any different result.

2:32:03Okay.

2:32:04And I I'm not personally willing to recommend that we move this on until we've got a comprehensive solution to the trees. Collecting an extra twenty five dollars an inch today isn't gonna stop any trees from being killed. And especially if they're already approved. How many plans are out there that are approved?

2:32:25Better ready to go. They can go knock 'em down today. It's not gonna do anything.

2:32:33But that's just me.

2:32:35Well that's the main thing that concerns me. It needs to be done and it needs to be done as quickly as possible because we don't there won't be any trees to save. So, um That's that's my impetus, whether it's fees or whether it's you know, percentage of the canopy. I I can see the percentage of the canopy. being important because You you're gonna say freeze then for sure, because they can't just say, Well You know, thirty five hundred dollars for

2:33:05this oak tree? Sure, I'll pay that. that. I'll just pass that pass all that

2:33:10note I quickly

2:33:10beat

2:33:11that out

2:33:11on my

2:33:11calculator. Thirty five hundred dollars is forty six inches of trees. Right.

2:33:17So

2:33:18That's one of those heritage trees.

2:33:20So I do like the canopy stuff because uh I when they knock down those heritage trees, that just kills me. I just Yeah, I just and I know it's more important to save canopy bunches in s instead of individual trees, but still when you see a two hundred year old tree and somebody knocks it down, it that's just not that doesn't work for me.

2:33:42So yeah. And time is of the essence, you know, because especially if we're going to exempt those that are grandfathered in, people have applications in, which is a fair thing to do, but that doesn't stop them from

2:33:55Yeah.

2:33:57Tearing down trees.

2:33:57Right. Right.

2:34:00What I'm I personally would like to see a continuance, but then staff bring back an ordinance and bring it back in short order and bring it back in a form that guarantees trees are going to be saved. The public wants trees saved. I think the commissioners want trees saved. I want trees saved. But A fee is not a guarantee that the tree's gonna get saved. a mandate that you're gonna save a tree. Is a guarantee that the tree's gonna get saved.

2:34:28I guarantee you, sir, the uh the builders are gonna love this, that we're delaying this. And uh we're I'm sure we're gonna get a flood of site plans now, but um You know, it's your it's your decision and we'll carry forward. If you want to continue it, then we'll continue it and we'll we'll come back in November with a comprehensive plan I was recommending just moving forward because the board already adopted new ordinance. Um just to get this cap in place. Um because it you know, it's fair to our state outside external business stakeholders. They

2:34:58they w they need it.

2:35:08How much time do um would staff need to um address some of the stuff that we brought up today? Well we had

2:35:13the workshop in July.

2:35:17Well there I mean there there's substance things here. Uh Mr. Moody wanted to Change the ordinance to require fees to be not approved and changed by resolution by ordinance. That's an L D C matter. Um Uh Mr. Girardi was uh was concerned about the effective date of these fees. That that's something we could bring back fairly quickly. Um And uh Mr. Moody, you wanted to foc you wanted to do it comprehensive because you appreciate

2:35:47the inflation factor with the fees, but you want to have um teeth in it that were really protecting and preserving trees like the Alchua twenty percent canopy objective.

2:35:57I would say in terms of that last point, um, staff wanted to ensure that we had the opportunity to have effective collaboration with TBBA and other stakeholders before bringing it to you to ensure that they're involved in the process and they they could give appropriate feedback. And November would be the earliest day that we'd be able to do that and allow for that type of collaboration.

2:36:21I mean me personally I'm not too concerned with the flood of applications given the current market environment in the next month or month and a half. So that's just my opinion.

2:36:31I also think November's gonna come and we're gonna snap our fingers and it's gonna be here. So I don't think there's any reason to

2:36:37To

2:36:38do it right.

2:36:38Right. Yeah. Take the time, do

2:36:40it right.

2:36:40Well, as I tell my family on Thanksgiving, I'll see you next time. We'll be we'll be back in November, it looks like. Okay.

2:36:49Then do we have a planning commission date in November so we can

2:36:53I believe it's uh November twentieth if I'm resource we're right. Patty, can you confirm?

2:36:58Ten twenty. So before we vote to continue though, I think we have to provide the public a chance to

2:37:06Yeah, I think they would be upset if they sat there all the time. Yes. They

2:37:10came for a reason.

2:37:11Yeah. I mean We just cut them down to one minute.

2:37:16Howdy How do you confirm that it's eleven uh eleven twenty? For the

2:37:20next meeting.

2:37:22All right, so uh I think we have members of the public that would like to speak.

2:37:27Uh Mr. Chairman first on the list is Ms. Partnett. There

2:37:31you go.

2:37:32Yeah. Hi. Um Julia Bartuna, [address removed]. And uh again here in beautiful Pasco County. And um I wanted to say uh just speak a little bit about uh trees and um I notice when a neighbor cuts down a tree that immediately there are cracks in the road and potholes form. Um we live in a you know

2:38:02integrated ecosystem Which also supports us and supports developments. So when we clear cut forests and then burn the trees, um, it impacts us, it impacts our infrastructure and impacts flooding also. So the importance of trees in preventing stormwater runoff is integral because of their root systems. Obviously, I'm against cutting down all

2:38:32trees except for invasives. I'd like to see those get cut down. However, the standard should not be to cut down any live oaks. Uh that are more than 24 inches in diameter. That is a conservation standard. So yes, uh uh increasing fees may or may not be a deterrent. I I am in support of increasing fees, obviously, because

2:39:03the fees will go to tree mitigation funds and Lastly, I would like to say that we're so grateful that everyone is working really, really hard on this and diligently, and that everyone here uh represents the concern to maintain Pasco's uh tree canopies and to preserve our legacy oaks and our heritage oaks uh so that we can. can keep, you know, Pasco County

2:39:33beautiful and I appreciate all the work that and effort that you have all put into this and and the progress that's being made and the upcoming tree plantings. That is a very, very, very, very wonderful. So much respect in that. Thank you.

2:39:49Thank you very much. She's a lot less nervous this time. I know she's better. Thanks.

2:39:58Who's next? Next on the list would be Ms. Kathryn Capello.

2:40:04Hi everybody.

2:40:05Hello?

2:40:07Catherine, we need your name and address.

2:40:09Hello. Hello?

2:40:10Just need your name and address.

2:40:14[address removed].

2:40:18Okay.

2:40:18It's great to be here. And thanks. I feel like I'm speaking to the choir, so that's a nice thing. Um trees filter the pollutants from the air. They provide oxygen so we can breathe. Yeah. Um P preserving mature trees can also increase the value of the properties by ten to twenty percent. And along with what Sonia was saying in reference to clean cutting when they just knock down all the trees, that creates the

2:40:48greenhouse effect, and all the carbon dioxide that was trapped in the ground comes into the sky and makes the temperatures hotter. So there's some really critical reasons for selective cutting where

2:41:07You rarely um Methodical and thoughtful about the process because it matters. That's all. Thank you.

2:41:15Thank you very much.

2:41:18You only get one shot at it, sorry. Unless somebody hasn't questioned. Anybody have a question for our first speaker?

2:41:30Okay, I have a question then. Come on up. If you just

2:41:34wanna I just wanted to say that Jesse Forken sends her apologies because she got a flat tire and couldn't be here. Thank you.

2:41:42Okay, well we're gonna scold her for that. Thank you. Who's next?

2:41:50Next on the list would be Ms. Nicole Wynn.

2:41:54Nicole in? There we there we go.

2:42:02Nicole Lynn, forty nine twenty one Memorial, uh, Tampa, Florida, suite three hundred. I have been sworn. Um I just wanted to bring up I have uh been part of the meetings that we've been having with staff, so thank you very much that we have been having additional conversations since the last meetings that you all have had. I'm not going to regurgitate because you had plenty of conversation, all of which we had discussed, except for I did want to mention two things. Phasing was a big concern.

2:42:32We identified that.

2:42:36love for it to be part of the r um conditions that you guys propose to the board um to refer to them because grandfathering was a big thing especially of MPUDs um as you pointed out. Um and then the uh the last thing is really just looking for clarification as to the effectiveness in your opinion as to and maybe Ms. Blair can give some clarity on that, the effectiveness of anything moving forward due to the resolution and ordinance

2:43:07thing as far as the fees that the board had already heard, so that we know whether or not for planning purposes, when that cap. that we're trying to get included would actually take effect or in in uh the midst of ongoing conversations going till November what those fees that the board already heard would go into effect. That's it. Okay, thank you.

2:43:32Okay, well I can give you my thought on that. The resolution's pretty clear that that section's not effective until this repeal happens. So it really is what it is. It's we're in limbo until anything gets adopted. For that portion of the resolution.

2:43:50Okay, and uh somebody else on the list?

2:43:53Last but not least, Ms. Melanie Landerson.

2:43:58Melanie Lamberson?

2:44:02Nancy, uh would like to supplement that spot.

2:44:06So

2:44:07Jeremy wants to speak if we don't add them anymore.

2:44:17Nancy Hazewood [address removed]. It's nice to see y'all again. You've been doing a great job and staff. You've been very thoughtful with all this. Um

2:44:31Sasha mentioned uh Angeline. And I've been um very impressed with it. And I was talking about it to people in my groups and somebody saying, Oh no, it's it's got a lot of homes in there and no trees And then I talked to the county biologist and they said that some of the land was bought by either Swift Mud or uh ELASP, I'm not sure which, but you've got swaths of trees

2:45:02behind these houses through parts of it. And it just makes all the difference in the world. And I don't know what to do to encourage that, but I think that ought to be a state-of-the-art. John, I liked what you said about 20%. That sounded real good too. Um Our trees save our natural resources. We need 'em like somebody else was saying earlier, and they complement the county.

2:45:33I've also noticed a lot of the agland has very few trees on it all of a sudden. I think it's kind of odd that people are going into their ag land with their cattle and cutting their trees. I'm going by some of these places and finding cattle. They've found one tree and they're all huddling under that. I'm not sure what's going on with that, and I was wondering if that could be looked into and maybe encouraged them not to cut their trees. I'm thinking, well maybe they're getting it shovel ready and that

2:46:03scares the heck out of me. But um I think y'all are being very considerate and I hope we have something wonderful coming out soon that will start saving our natural canopies. Thank y'all.

2:46:16Okay. Thank you.

2:46:25Commissioner's Jeremy Couch [address removed]. I have been sworn. I've heard a lot of information up here today. I generally um feel that this ordinance was passed very, very quickly without much stakeholder input at all. Um I am an affected party. Mr. Gerardi, I have an application in process. for an office building and I was told by staff that I owe a lot more money

2:46:55than what I had budgeted for. and staff didn't really know how to determine whether or not that this was applicable to my project or not my personal project. This is concerning. Um I do think there needs to be a cap. I think that's very important. I think that needs to be passed as soon as possible. um the people who are gonna be affected are the home buyers, particularly the first time home buyers. You know, we keep

2:47:25it. Taking. Now we o don't like five foot side yards. So we lose twenty percent of the homes. And now we want to save more trees. We lose more. It's gonna cost five hundred thousand dollars for a thousand square foot home in this county soon. So we really need to think about the economic impact of what we're doing. Um I think that the ordinance definitely needs to go through public hearings. I'm a member of the TBBA. I

2:47:56probably permit and build two thousand homes and units in Pasco County a year. At zero. input into this ordinance. Even the way it's written, I have projects now that the way it's written today, before the cap uh people under contract to purchase property And they're looking at a million dollars added to their development that they had zero idea. Um I think we should only be replacing

2:48:26paying to replace trees over a certain size. Uh Scrub tree. Pine tree that grows this big in one year. Why would we pay for Five hundred dollars to remove that. It doesn't make sense. The end user will eat this. the employees that we want to bring here and the employers When they can't get reasonable housing, attainable housing in this county. for their employees will not move here. So

2:48:57I agree with the aesthetics. I understand. But I think we need to incentivize developers with increased density. if they're gonna preserve twenty percent of their land or their canopy. Reduce setbacks, A give and take. That makes reasonable sense. And then further with that money. I mean planting trees in the right away is great, but that what that does to the county is Who's gonna prune the trees? Now the county's gotta pay to take care of these trees. Why don't we

2:49:27take this money and also purchase Elamp properties? Um to where we can have meaningful preservation and use. in the middle of Arius. I mean there's a lot of good things we can do. It just happened this happened really, really quickly. And I was surprised and I was affected. And I hope that's a good idea. This kinda gets out in the open. It was well intended. I get it, why it went through quickly, but it would be better to follow good due process.

2:49:57Jeremy, a quick question. in the early discussions. about this one of the things you know Mr. Gray and I had talked about Here. was providing a density bonus for saving trees. You just brought the same kind of thing up.

2:50:20Is there All we've done is talk about it. It really comes down, someone's got to come up with a number. Do you have any ideas on what kind of If one saved if let's say we had in the in an ordinance that we mandate you save twenty percent of the tree canopy, how much of a how much of a density

2:50:41bump, sure. A twenty percent bonus density. Give them a twenty percent bonus density. Yeah. I mean i incentivize incentivize these these these type of things. Uh I and I don't know. I mean I'm just shooting from the hip. I understand. Yeah.

2:50:55Me too, I haven't thought exactly clearly through, but I'd like to

2:51:03Well here's the the conundrum, Mr. Moody. Most of our projects come in under entitlement already. So we're giving a density bonus on something that's not gonna be used in most cases. So we'd have to find some other value to provide as an incentive.

2:51:20Well,

2:51:21I made the suggestion before

2:51:25Dad. Maybe when Of course Jeremy Jeremy may not agree with me on this. But maybe when we Ms. Wilhite and Mr. Hobby and the rest come in with their clients. That The initial proposal is sixty foot lots. And then when you save the trees and you provide the neighborhood parks and you provide the multi use trails on whether it be the south or the east side of the street, then you get fifty five foot lots and when you provide the

2:51:55community garden like at Angeline, then you get the fifty foot lot and you know, if you want the goodies, you wanna get down to the forty five foot wide lots, you gotta give us back some goodies. Right now we give it away. We and I know David sat up here and said, Well, we've got certain we got PM twenty six, which now we're We're legislating via policy memo. But we've said it out from the here. Look, we'll g you come to Pasco County, we'll give you forty five foot wide lots. We didn't have a negotiation session with some of

2:52:26these guys. We'll give you the 45 foot wide lots when I get some things. You can s remember. The in our code The MPUD is to be reserved for projects which are unique. Okay? Where they have to create their own standard because they're trying to preserve wetlands or preserve trees or some special feature of the property. We got everybody using the MPUD to just to try to maximize the number of lots I can put on a piece of property.

2:52:57I've seen giant square pieces of property come in here that are cow fields. With we're doing this as an MPUD so that I can make twenty-foot townhomes under PM twenty-six and maximize the the maximum possible number of them I can get.

2:53:15Without

2:53:15regard to

2:53:16I actually I wanted to ask Mr. Couch a question when you

2:53:18Sure, go ahead. And I apologize, Jeremy. I

2:53:22No apologies, sir.

2:53:25Hi. Um this resolution that's currently in effect that the board adopted has a lot of focus on the first section. But the last section actually has some very interesting things in it that you may not be aware of. It's actually section three, authorized expenditures. There is the last paragraph there, number four, that talks about costs associated with the purchases of conservation easement or deed restrictions on private property. Okay. That that is purposely brand new language in there. So that's that you can actually use the existing tree mitigation fund right now

2:53:54under this existing resolution to be able to do a project with the developer where tree stands are identified that are worthy of the canopy we're all talking about right now will be protected by this paragraph right now using tree mitigation funds. So it's not ELAMP dollars, it's it's the tree mitigation fund that we have so much that's piled up. and waiting to be used. So I would love it if someone could start doing this this idea here. And you know you're interested in using ELAMP funds, why don't you explore using tree mitigation funds under this existing paragraph right now to

2:54:25save the tree stands, the canopy and have the incentive that you're talking about.

2:54:31Like or along the Anklet River or other places where They're they're critically important.

2:54:36Well that's what ELAMP can be used for too. But this is specific to a project and the concept behind this um actually came from one of our commissioners, um l legislative aides. And the idea is that you know you it can play out in the scenario like you're an MPUD applicant, you come in here, you work with natural resources to identify a tree canopy stand that you want to have in the middle of your community park that you want to design around. And we'll pay you to do that. That's right here in this resolution. So

2:55:02That's that's fantastic.

2:55:04No one's noticed it. It's but it's here. It's a it's a new step forward. That's very fantastic. Okay. Elizabeth.

2:55:11It's because it's buried in a resolution that was in a on a consent agenda to which there was no public notice or no public hearing. But

2:55:19I'm glad I'm able to bring it up right now in this context because it serves your purposes that you've pointed out.

2:55:23Thank you.

2:55:30I agree.

2:55:30And answer Mr. Couch's question about uh Angeline. That eco corridor was purchased as part of the Elon program because it is a it is a corridor that's designated.

2:55:44So that's true that it's a quarter. We bought that.

2:55:46But with regards to the grandfathering I think we're all in agreement on on that that you brought up um as well. And and you also brought up another good point too, 'cause there's a lot of discussion going on in this current environment about affordable housing and You know, so we have to balance that. You know, we want to keep the trees but we also need to be able to keep the housing affordable for people to be able to have housing here in the county. So that's The flip side what we always need to c contend with.

2:56:15I think my biggest concern about what Jeremy said is stakeholder involvement and kinda lack of involvement in in the process. I know how active Jeremy is in this county and I think that that's all the more reason to continue this to November. For sure.

2:56:30Well and I think that goes back to the whole resolution for the fee. I mean, I think I brought up at the last meeting. I find it hard to believe that a resolution was adopted. I w I watched just because I happened I don't even know why I looked at the agenda, but I noticed that resolution was on the board agenda and I couldn't believe that the board was changing the fee on the trees and there was not one person that I thought would be interested in that present at that meeting. Because

2:56:52nobody knew.

2:56:53Right, exactly. That's my point. So

2:56:56the only reason it got because one commissioner pulled it off the consent agenda. Correct.

2:57:01Yeah, we no nobody knew, but we we were in discussions and uh I think I reported to the Planning Commission with it with with our sta extern external stakeholders for two years on it. It was it wasn't just uh an overnight deal, but you're right. Uh The actual proceeding wasn't public. Sure. As far as a hearing.

2:57:21And I would say since then the draft for the amended resolution has been shared with external stakeholders and they haven't provided any um opposition to what we've shared with them thus far.

2:57:34The T B B A.

2:57:37Their view is is let's do the cap as soon as possible. That was their concern. But but I I hear I hear you and uh and if the board takes a vote to continue to the November meeting, we'll come back with a comprehensive package.

2:57:49And Amanda, I I don't mean to to sound argumentative. Again, the T B and and this is not to to say anything disrespectful about the T B B A. They're not the only developers in the world, they're not the only people who come in and apply for permits at the county. Everybody is entitled to participate in the process. We have a state statute that says the property owners Rights. There's a bill of rights in that statute number five is you have the right to

2:58:19due process. Not just not ex just exclusively for the T B B A. Anyway so

2:58:27will we

2:58:27have a motion? What was the date in November?

2:58:31Eleven twenty.

2:58:32Mm-hmm. m move to continue this Move to continue the matter to the 1120 hearing is this in Dade City or Newport Ritchie. Newport Ritchie. In Newport Ritchie. With the recommendation that staff bring the an entire or comprehensive ordinance back to the Planning Commission for consideration.

2:58:54Yeah.

2:58:56Motion

2:58:56second.

2:58:58And with your with your motion, you know, the consideration of the things that we brought up about the grandfathering and Fees by uh resolution as opposed to ordinance. Yes, yes. All of those things.

2:59:12You got all those down, right? I'll

2:59:14watch a recording. I got I got

2:59:16clerks

2:59:16down there.

2:59:19Yeah.

2:59:20That's right. I know you do.

2:59:23Okay, so we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Not all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign? Okay. Question carries. I can still hear the can rattling. I'd like to thank all the members of the public for hanging in there and letting us hear what you think. And we'll try to do our best. Move to adjourn. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. I

2:59:53didn't hear any noise. Yeah.