An Ordinance Amending The Pasco County Comprehensive Plan; Providing For A Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment To The Future Land Use Map (Map 2-15 And Sheet 10) Changing From COM (Commercial) And RES-9 (RESIDENTIAL -9 DU/GA) To RES-6 (RESIDENTIAL-6 DU/GA) On Approximately 26.2 Acres Of Real Property Located Approximately 600 Feet East Of The Intersection Of Little Road And Ross Lane; And Providing For Additional Text Amendments As Necessary For Internal Consistency; Providing For a Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date.
What the county recorded
Staff recommendation
Approve
DispositionAdopted
Approved to adopt by a roll call vote.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Jan 20, 2026
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Board of County Commissioners, Jan 20, 2026
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
This case, across meetings
PDE-26-0173 in full →PDE-26-0173 was taken up 2 times between Nov 20, 2025 and Jan 20, 2026 — this is appearance 2.
- Nov 20, 2025PlanningAP13▶No disposition in the minutes
- Jan 20, 2026BoardP38▶Adoptedthis item
What was said
Machine transcription of 50m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 90% of 282 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
roll call vote. It is a roll call, uh Commissioner Oakley, District One. Aye. District two, Commissioner Weightman. Aye. District three, Commissioner Starkey. Aye. District four, Commissioner Yeager. Aye. District five, Chairman Mariano. Aye. Motion passes 5-0. Item P thirty eight. B 38, uh we have proof of publication in the Tampa Bay Times on November 5th, 2025, supplemented by an affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.
All right, so P38 is also an adoption hearing for a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment, an ordinance amending the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan, providing for a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map, map two-15 and sheet 10. Changing from Calm Commercial and Res 9 residential 9 dwelling units per gross acre to res 6 residential 6 dwelling units per gross acre on approximately 26.2 acres of real property located approximately
600 feet eastern. Of the intersection of Little Road and Ross Lane, and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency, providing for repealer severability and an effective date. This comes to you with a recommendation to accept public comment and adopt by roll call vote. The MPUD rezoning does have a companion, or there is a companion MPUD rezoning item P43 with this one as well. And there's a presentation if necessary.
Okay. Um I'd like to see the presentation. Okay.
Okay.
Rossing.
Good afternoon. Hiya Mazilli, Planning Development and Economic Growth, and I will be presenting item P38. Uh we'll start with the project's overview. Thank you, Gina. So the applicant is proposing a comprehensive plan, small-scale comprehensive plan amendment to change the future land use designation from Res 9, residential 9 dwelling unit per gross acre, and Calm commercial to Res 6, residential 6 dwelling unit per gross acre. And the intent of this proposal is to
create a unified residential future land use designation. To allow for the development of 74 single-family detach units on approximately 26.2 acres site. This site is located on Ross Lane, approximately 600 feet east of Little Road. As Amy mentioned, there is a campaign rezoning petition to MPUD in the name of DRB, Little and Ross MPUD.
This map shows the general location of the subject site, which is located in the West Market area and within the urban service area. This is a zoomed-in aerial of the location of the subject site. As you can see, the site is just north of our government building. It is situated south of Ridge Road, east of Little Road, and just north of Ross Lane.
And this map provides the existing context surrounding the subject site, which is currently undeveloped. The surrounding area includes a mixture of uses with commercial development to the north along Ridge Road and to the west along Little Road. And we have the Crescent Residential Community located to the east of the subject site. Although not shown on this map, the VA Hospital is located to the south of the subject site.
Next, we have this slide that illustrates the existing transportation network. There is an existing sidewalk located along the east side of Little Road. There are no sidewalks along Ross Lane. However, the applicant is proposing to construct a sidewalk on the north side of Ross Lane, and specific details of this sidewalk will be addressed during the MPUD presentation.
This is a map showing the existing future land use. As you can see a portion of the site is Calm Commercial and the rest is Res9. Com is also to the north and the west of the subject site.
And how much is commercial, acreage wise?
As far as the com?
Yes.
Or the com is about
Three hundred seventy-six thousand three hundred and fifty-eight square feet. The entire site is twenty-six point two acres.
Okay, so acres to acres, how much?
Approximately fourteen and a half acres. Thank you.
This is a map showing the proposed future land use. The entire subject site is proposed to be residential six-dwelling unit per gross acre. And REST six aligns with the surrounding densities and the suburban development pattern in the area.
So after review and analysis, the Planning Development Economic Growth Department found the proposed amendment to be consistent with the following comprehensive plan policies. Rest six, policy flu 1.4.3, policy flu 1.8.7, policy flu 1.8.10 and policy flu 8.1.1.
So based on the comprehensive plan consistency analysis, staff recommend the board to um access public comment and adopt the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and ordinance by call by roll call vote. And I'm happy to answer any other questions unless you would like to hear the MPAD presentation and then.
I think I'd like to go right to the M P
Okay,
thank you.
We have proof of publication of the hearing of this matter in the November 5th, 2025 edition of the Tampa Bay Times, supplemented by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.
Good afternoon, William for Million Planning Development, Economic Growth. This is the companion MPD rezoning to the previously mentioned CPA, PDE twenty six seventy-eight ninety-three.
The location map. This is a rezoning request of the right-of-way. From A C agricultural. T and C two general commercial to MPD Master Development District to allow for the maximum development. Of seventy four single family Detached homes and associated infrastructure on approximately twenty six point two acres. Uh th those single family detached homes are a minimum of sixty feet in width. This is located in the Western Market area, budding the northeast corner of Little
Road and Ross Lane Intersection. Here's the location map. You can see out towards Little Road, some of that commercial property has already been commercially subdivided. And then as you move uh further west onto Ross Lane, or further east onto Ross Lane, you find the subject site highlighted in red. It is the site of an old uh tree farm. The current zoning map. And the current future land use map reflecting the Res9 and commercial flues
on the subject site.
Here is the contextual map to the north to orient the commission exists the hardware store with the commercial subdivision happening as you move further west along Little Road and then on the southern portion south of Ross Lane exists the uh the Veterans Affair building.
Here is the MPUD master plan which roughly highlights the internal street uh network here as well as some of the pedestrian improvements, but it's further illustrated here on the binding concept plan showing those uh 60-foot minimum single-family detached lots as well as the the sidewalk along Ross Lane, both along the entirety of the project's frontage as well as that yellow piece as you move towards the commercial subdivision. The applicant is building off-site sidewalk to fill
the gap there with the commercial piece for mobility fee credits. The on-site portion, of course, not mobility fee creditable. The red portion Uh that you can see up to the north is an eight foot uh eight foot walking path, a nature trail, that will provide further pedestrian connection to the commercial subdivision that's already occurred alongside Little Road. and then to the north of that pond. In orange we can see the internal six foot trail that's proposed along the north side
of that pond that comes down uh through that uh what could have been a lot green space as you connect onto one of those internal roads.
This is a connectivity exhibit provided by the applicant with drone shots that overlays those those same color coordination to the eight foot, six foot, and five foot of the uh the pedestrian facilities that we're talking about being constructed with this project. as it pertains to the site aerially You can see they're highlighted in orange, in red, and then in green and yellow along the project frontage.
There is one LDC variation with this product, project from nine oh one six D eleven street design and dedication requirements. The applicant requests to not provide a vehicular interconnection to the north or to the west.
If you would stay on that slide for a second. Oh. Yeah. I've got an issue with not connecting. So if you would Again our code says they need to s they should be connecting. We're Uh the seeking a variation of that. Would you go back to the slide that showed the layout?
Right there. So There's a road that runs north south that they could connect to, correct?
I believe you're you're talking about King Healy that runs north south.
Go go up from Oh internal to the development? Internal to the development.
Yes sir.
You got options on a roadway going right to the front from where
Jeltson and goes all the way up to the blue area where the drainage area is. There's an opportunity there to connect to a roadway, correct?
There there would be an opportunity um I guess I hadn't I hadn't finished my my justification for the variation, but I know. So to the north of that is the uh if I could go back to the aerial here. That's actually it would spit the uh the residents out right into the the loading zone of the uh of the lows. They use that side access and if if we could zoom in or go to mapper. it'd be helpful. But you can see that that's actually their their loading area. It's pretty narrow and uh it's gonna be Uh
a bunch of semi trucks and larger box trucks delivering goods there. You can you can see there on the right there with that delivery bay where they stack all their old pallets. So that was one of the reasons staff didn't feel like a connection was feasible to the north. And that's to the north. Okay. So let's talk to the west,
because
that's my biggest issue is the west.
Can you oh let me take it back to the binding plan. Are you guys controlling it or I am I am.
Okay. I appreciate it.
So on the on the so let's look at the west part.
The West Park comes out into a small little roadway that's that would get them to all the commercial in this whole
Yeah.
Get them off Ross Lane, get them off to the side. No big trucks running through there and then get on there and save all those trips trips to go in there. Pedestrians are great, but I don't think if you're gonna go to Lowe's and pick up some two by fours, et cetera, you're gonna be coming back and carrying those things back in a in a bicycle cart or something else. So to have all that commercial right there to take these people out on Ross Lane. When I don't need to. To not put them in there. I don't know why you guys would allow them to go against our code and look for a variation with that. I would have made them put that in there. And I think this
board, Commissioner Starkey we talk all the time about how we try to interconnect.
I did talk to the applicant's attorney at during lunchtime about that same thing. And I think when she comes out to present, she's gonna tell you they're prohibited to connect by the property owners.
Is that part of your presentation?
I'm gonna let the applicant speak to the to the to those legalities.
Yeah, they don't want to
commercial property. That's supposed to be commercial property, not connecting to that roadway. Does that make any sense to anybody? Think about it. They're converting commercial property along that slot. And you're going to tell me that I have the commercial property and I can't connect? Absolutely
absurd.
Well
if if I if I may, stamp's variation analysis, uh its its support didn't hinge upon the legalities of a connection being uh provided by some kind of property asso property owners or commercial associations uh prohibitions in in an ECR. However, our our justification relied upon
Let me stop you for a second. Go back to
where you showed the commercial parcel of the property that that is along that roadway. The
Go back to that.
It's in the there's there's another slide that shows before development What part is commercial, what's part residential?
D do the do the future land use map where it shows the the comm polygon. Thank you.
Sure. So So if I'm looking at that piece of property that says commercial. And I own that piece of property. You're gonna say that I don't have the right You think they get the right not to connect to that property right beside it?
Well so th this applicant if if it's a private
road and they
don't have to this this app this that commercial piece is a is a portion of this this application. So it would no longer have the commercial flu. Is it it'll be a part of this this residential development?
I'm just
saying if I own that
commercial piece. If I'm if I have that commercial piece. Are you talking are are you speaking of the portion highlighted in red or the out parcels there in yellow?
I'm I think I'm looking at the part that says calm. That's right there. And those four lots that are right to the side of it that are a beige, that slot that's right in there, that commercial piece of property all the way through, there's a roadway right in front of it. And We don't think they have a right to connect to that?
Well so the that commercial portion is a part of this
I I know. So what I'm saying is you say a residential can't c connect to it. What I'm telling you is before we change this over, that if I've got a commercial piece of property, I gotta think I got rights to connect to that.
Well I can let the the applicant speak to the l the legalities behind the ECR. I'd still like to go through the staff variation analysis outside of the ECR as to why we would support this request if that's all right. I
Yeah. Yes,
go ahead. Thank you. So Could I have the binding concept plan up, please?
So P D you felt that you're not going to be able to do that. the the preservation of open space that's being enhanced by the Nature Trail as well as accommodating a pedestrian Um a pedestrian feature to to the commercial site was w was worth not having the connection when the connection is going to be made via Ross Lane on the organically forming internal frontage road that's happening via commercial subdivision. that would allow uh vehicular access to go north and south. rather than circulate through this neighborhood, which
could be accessed by pedestrians to the commercial outparcels. If one needed to go to Lowe's, you'd simply get on Ross Lane at where in the CIP we are signalizing that intersection. and then go straight north to Lowe's without having to get onto Little Road.
So you think it's better to go down Ross Lane? Which has got another neighborhood behind it, got a VA All seventy four lots going through to go take out go out here on Little Road, take a right turn, take a right turn back in, then when they're gonna return, they're gonna go back on Little Road, take a left turn, and a left left turn in again, as opposed to driving internally going right to Lowe's. You think that's a better way to go?
I don't I don't know if I directionally followed you there.
All I if
what I can tell
you is that
there's
a in
the
L me hel let me help you. I'm gonna explain it to you. If I'm inside that development and I have a connection to the road that's in front of this property and I can go take a right turn and go right into Lowe's I think it's a lot quicker, simpler and easier coming back out stay in the same internal road, staying off Ross Lane, staying off Little Road, no turns and no extra drip demand on the traffic that's out there. It's the connectivity which we talk about all the time, neighborhoods to neighborhoods, I'm talking about A residential neighborhood connected.
Well w with with this proposal with the organic internal frontage that's happening in this scenario you wouldn't have to go back out on Little Road, whether you're going to or from Lowe's. How are you gonna get there?
Yep, just take a ride out onto Ross. Uh it's about five hundred feet right onto the internal frontage road, and then you you go north without getting on Little Road. The the street pattern is as organically formed through commercial subdivision of that piece that's grayed out there.
I'm still going on Ross Lut though.
Happy to uh happy to let the applicant speak to the to the ECR as to as to the legality of their connection. I just wanted to make sure that that SNAP's point was clear that outside of that ECR These were the reasons that we were amenable to the applicant's request.
Uh tell me about the intersection Ross Lane Little Road. What's
gonna be out there? Sure. So there is uh thirty percent signal plans that are done for the signalization of uh of that intersection and it has it's on the CIP in fiscal year twenty-seven to be complete. As well as those uh the the aforementioned uh pedestrian improvements that are occurring along Ross Lade, uh the VA built their portion to the south to their access point. as well as a a portion of this, um, I guess some some textbook cleanup had to happen. The Ross Lane wasn't actually on the county maintenance
schedule. And I I know that within a within a month or two the resolution's gonna be brought forward to bring this county road back onto the to the county maintenance schedule.
Yeah. At the intersection on the lanes going out. Is there two lanes or one lane at the intersection?
Sure. As a part of that that design they are um contemplating additional lanes uh to help capacity there. So for for right turn movement, left turn movement and a through.
Right. I'm gonna have seventy-four cars plus the neighborhood, plus the VA. And to Reduce the stacking. I would think that we w would automatically put in that we would have a right turn lane and a left turn lane to be able
to go out. Yes, sir. But the turn lanes are a part of that that design for that intersection.
Okay, so it's not just being contemplated being designed.
We already have 30 percent design for that intersection, yes, sir.
This comes to you with a recommendation of approval from Planning Development Economic Growth and the Planning Commission. I'm here for any questions.
I do have one question. Um I already um I I I wanted the same thing, Commissioner, the connectivity, but I think you're gonna hear that's not possible. But um Can you go back to the just the previous map? Okay, that one. You're showing What is this connection here? Because isn't that a Is that north of what is the what is that gated community there? I had some friends that used to live in there. Cr
Crescent Forest. That road is connecting into Crescent Forest or is this b past Crescent Forest?
But that's actually past uh Crescent Forest. There's one home back there for the access and then the rest of the neighborhood uses Ross Lane.
So th so th there is a future connection. Happening here. Okay. Well that I got one anyway.
For one oh?
No no. Is that oh, is that only for one home?
It it's for a you know that you know that property could be redeveloped. It's a large a large property. At some point in time it could be redeveloped and the the connection will have will be easier to be made with this stub out. Oh I see it's what I'm doing.
Okay, so that's one big piece. All right. Well I think you need to hear from the applicant, but I am I I am gonna talk to them about street trees.
Right.
I learned we don't require.
Any other questions for staff?
Which I'm gonna make them.
All right. Let's hear from the applicant. Thank you. Heck
yeah.
Good afternoon. Since you're hearing the MPUD at the same time, do you wanna swear us in?
We can do that.
At this time, if there are anyone in the audience that expects to speak to any of the rezoning items that are going to be coming up, you would please take a Again, if you anticipate speaking to any of the zoning items on the agenda, if you'd please rise and raise your right hand. Do you and each of you swear to tell the truth in the matters being presented? So how have you got it?
I do.
At the time you come forward, if you please, when you give your sa name and uh your address, if you please acknowledge that you were sworn. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman you want to do procedures at this point too? Let's do procedures. There are two rezoning agendas, regular consent. Staff will present each application to the Board of County Commissioners if staff or planning commission has recommended approval and there is no opposition. The application will be considered by the Board without further presentation. If staff or planning commission has recommended a denial or if there is opposition to the application, the applicant will be given five minutes for presentation. The opposition will be given three minutes for each individual
or five minutes for a group representative. and the applicant will be given three minutes for rebuttal. Any individual disagreeing with staff or planning commission recommendation, or any one wishing to object to any condition of the rezoning, may at this time request The petition be pulled from the consent agenda, in which case that application will be heard under the regular agenda later on during the meeting. Otherwise, all rezoning applications on the consent agenda will be approved by a single motion and vote. If you
wish to speak to any petition, please give your name and address and whether or not you've been sworn for the record. These are quasi-judicial public hearings. The law in Florida is that mere public support or opposition of an application is insufficient for this board to take action. Please limit your comments to those criteria found within the Board's Land Development Code. Okay.
Barbara Wilheite, [address removed].
This is just an overall context slide. I think staff has already shown you a similar slide. This one's just backed out a little bit more where you can see the VA to the south, the commercial development to the west, the newer commercial development to the west, and then the more legacy development more towards the north.
As staff showed you, that is the um the zoning map. You can see the little bit of commercial. I would call that remnant commercial. What happens is when the county sets zoning district lines and comp plan lines, it doesn't necessarily match the depth of the commercial. This depth has been defined as the commercial that exists to our west. And so that's why you see that overlap. Yeah. And there is the comm overlap.
Under the current future land use, the property could have four hundred and twenty-one dwelling units. We're proposing seventy-four. An eighty-two percent uh less in drawing units. I can tell you we had a voluntary neighborhood meeting. and given what other people have proposed on this property. A lot of our neighbors are very happy that we're doing 60-foot single family homes to their beautiful homes to our east, single family detached to single family detached, and that we've got such a low density compared to what could be here. The
f the future land use provides for a very large, on a calculation standpoint, a very large amount of square feet. The current height, there's no ma there's no maximum height, because this is in the urban service area. We're proposing two stories.
Single f as I mentioned, 74 single family homes, 60-foot lots on square 6,000 square foot, 60-foot lots on 6,000 square foot lots. We have produced a binding concept plan. We're exceeding policy member PM26. To answer Commissioner Starkey, she had me look at street trees. PM 26 actually is not required for 60 foot lots, but we are complying with it. But your PM twenty-six requires two trees per lot. Um one can be in the front. Two can be in
the front. One can be in the front, one can be in the side or the rear, but there is no requirement for a street tree. You can use your front tree in the street if you'd like or on the front of your lot. At the request of the Commissioner, we anticipate this is going to be a very nice subdivision. We will add a street tree. Thank you. We need to work out that language with staff. Yes, it's an addition. So you've two l the cur current conditions say There's two trees required. We'll add a third tree and require that that one be a street tree.
I want to make sure it's not a crate myrtle. Or an understop tree. It's a shade tree.
We yes, that's fine. We do need to work on the specifics of that language. Hopefully if you approve this today, we can we can work that out in the final details. But we the client is happy to do that. So we're exceeding exceeding PM26. It doesn't apply with that. We have the monotony control, the architectural features, the HOA manage of our on-street parking, all the things that you put into PM26. These are example elevations of our 60-foot product. You can see we're bringing back the three-car
garages, which I used to have a home uh but before I bought my home in Golf Harbor's it had a three car garage, uh a very nice product. This is the binding concept plan that you've looked at. I think staff has gone over the connectivity, um pedestrian connectivity. There were gaps in the pedestrian connectivity. that we have filled in. I think there's a better way to show it, which is the drone aerial shots that um Tampa Civil did.
So this is the built environment. Mm. When you look at this is looking to the east and we've got Little Road going north-south, Ross Lane is to to our right. And the commercial development, when you heard staff talking about this organic reverse frontage road, it is an actual requirement. What's interesting is the commercial project to our west and all of the commercial development to the north are
part of a declaration. This property is not, even though it has com on it, is not part of that declaration. I am under oath. So, what I'm telling you is factual. I have a legal opinion. We didn't just say this. The county attorney's office made us prove it. We proved and to their satisfaction that this Property is not part of that declaration and does not have legal access to their private and they're not roads, they're driveways, they're private driveways.
And you
can you
explain what a declaration is? Because that's not something we're used
to. It's you could call it a covenant of restrictions. It's a uh it is a What I'm not a transactional attorney speed
restriction, basically. It's a it's a recorded document that has conditions for that specific development, much like you're used to seeing as an M Pud condition, except it only applies to the property that it attaches to and is recorded um in advance of sale of lots.
And so when the commercial development came forward, because I represent the commercial development, the county made sure that this reverse frontage road was put in. There was a gap. that they didn't own. on Wendy's property, because they were all subject to the same declaration This property does not have the benefit of the subject property that we're rezoning. Mm. Wendy's had to accommodate that leg of the driveway that goes up to King Healy, the light at King Healy. So very purposefully the
County said Mr. Kate. Hassan Gail who's here said there will be a reverse frontage road going from Ross, so anybody on Ross Lane doesn't have to get out, including this project, does not have to get out on Little Road and can go up and through here. So the vehicular connectivity running have the its own frontage road is going in. And we'll be there. There was gaps in the pedestrian network. And why is it? So
Why was there gaps? So there's two gaps. One is on Ross Lane.
Because your current your exist your prior code, I don't know if they f I think they fixed it when they just redid your code dealing with p pedestrian facilities. But when a project comes in For development. there is a requirement that they put sidewalk in. So when the I don't remember what the corner is, if it's Chipotle or or what uh what the user was at that corner of Little and Ross, but they're in for review, that one they had to do a sidewalk. but behind them was a pond, And so they didn't trigger
the sidewalk. We have to say that so and but I you know, so I but I think they've been on this you know, this has happened a bit ago w under the old code. So we we came in and we'll say, Look at the right-of-way. We don't want our folks walking in the dirt. You know, they're gonna we're gonna put a sidewalk in, then they'll be we'll put the extension of the sidewalk off site. So that is provided for. When you look at the frontage road. road the frontage road has pedestrian facilities into it.
There you
go.
The frontage road has a pedestrian facility into it, up to the point where they put the driveway in on Wendy's property. No pedestrian facility. So they get another gap. So You know, we don't just kind of put this thing these things to you. We actually look at them and try to make sure things make sense and that we do what we need to do. So here where the red is, that's a gap. So When folks would if we didn't fix that, folks would come down and walk along the new frontage road and then walk in the dirt.
or on the road to get to Lowe's. So we're fixing that with this project. That'll be an eight foot path, red is eight foot path. We're bringing an eight foot path out of our project and then putting the new eight foot path so there'll be pedestrian facility all along that reverse frontage road, love reverse frontage road. And that's what we are doing as part of our project. So I hope that answers the questions. I would just say the other thing about the interesting about that declaration is It's not a association, it's an ownership,
and there's six to at least six to eight property owners, national property owners. Um When the commercial folks came in they worked with just Wendy's because they were already benefiting from that declaration. But it took them, I don't know, a year, yeah, two years to to get the approval from Wendy's to put in the road that was contemplated by the declaration. So kind of crazy that's right. So those so those all those property owners and and when you look at King Healy as the as you come up to the light between Wendy's and KFC That
pr road, that property where the road is, is owned by Kentucky Fried Chicken. So It's not just like so simple to say You should, it makes sense to, we can't.
All right, so do me a favor, just go back to the previous slide.
So from that angle
So w with a red line. Is heading to the north.
Yes.
That property is partially commercial now, correct?
Part of our parcel has commercial zoning on it. It's about 5.7 acres of commercial zoning and part of it has a com land use to 14 acres of comm land use. The zoning and the land use don't match. The ownership lines and the
Okay. But but where it where it says on the it's on the left side of the screen it says eight foot wide bicycle pass through an axis that you have right there. That section right there, is that commercial now or is that residential?
Um that zoning is commercial.
So my my straight question is this if it stayed commercial would they have access to get to there? No matter what?
No. What that's kinda kinda crazy. Well that's
Well they come out to Ross.
That's because sometimes A lot of times our zoning district lines, our land use lines don't match property ownership lines, and this is an example of that.
Okay. And I I'll say for everyone to know, Barbara and I had did have this discussion. discussion. Um you were going to check to it. I never heard back from you, so I don't know. And we're here in a telling you.
We've re we've been asked this question a bunch. It's so it's an absolutely appropriate question. We the county attorneys asked it, staff asked it, so we are we are
and our commercial I mean our and our attorneys agree that there is no access that can be had. David, I'm assuming you you've reviewed
this.
Is that it's uh I there was no reasoning in the opinion, so I can't say whether I agree or disagree.
But we did we hired w because I don't do real estate, so it wasn't my opinion, the client hired real estate Counsel to give a legal opinion and they put a legal opinion signed by them and their firm that We are this property is not a good idea. benefiting or subject to that declaration, it's not part of that declaration, which I knew. This I've been representing this property before it was single family homes when it was multifamily rentals. For the sake of the property owners
around. It's and I think hopefully the county, everybody's very happy with this client um in the single family detached homes but so but I they hired real estate counsel and a a fine law firm to review the issue and issue a legal opinion.
That is to to get to the commissioner's point. if they have no easement of record, They can't Connect to the commercial. No matter what the land use or those are no matter what the it's i i it you know
But All right, that's why that's why I want to make sure because it just doesn't
make sense to me. I don't I can't tell you that that's the facts, but what Barbara is saying is The the commercial property that it currently exists is under one One easement one covenant document which provides for the easement This property is excluded from it. in which case they would have to purchase the right to connect to it if They wanted to connect to it.
Right. wanted to even entertain a phone call.
Mr. Starkey.
Um I agree you know, that was the first thing I talked to her about said, Well we're gonna we need that to connect, but I got what you just got. But I also um I was concerned about the width of the Bicycle pedestrian access and I'm very happy that it's eight feet. Um, this could be a golf cart community. And I know we keep talking about them going to the lows, but the reality is hopefully they're gonna go to those restaurants and help keep those restaurants afloat. Probably more than they're gonna go to Lowe's.
So but They can tootle around in their golf carts from this neighborhood. They can. Next.
Yeah. That's correct. They'll be able to access all of that commercial, including Ruby Tuesdays and I I do um I
do question why we didn't make whoever put that pond in Put a sidewalk along the front of it. What what was missing in our code? I know you and I have talked about missing gaps all over the place, and that just seems like we missed something. Staff wise. uh or somehow or or us up here. That's the right-of-way. They got away without a little bit. What, the sidewalk goes to the pond and then just dumps you in the dirt? That's
correct.
That's not okay. But I think that I mean the county the your staff just brought forward an amended pedestrian facilities. We're letting that happen before, is my question.
Okay.
They just need to look at it at subdivision review. Because if you look at it piece by piece after subdivision review, you only see your piece. But subdivision review, they look at all of it.
If if if you guys are comfortable that there's nothing they could do except go through nine firms and trying to get
trained, we even we even took it to a private law firm that that's what they do and they looked at it and opined. I mean that based what I'm testifying is wait based upon what they gave me, 'cause I don't do that type of work. So,
All right, my questions are answered. Uh any more questions for Barbara? Let's go to public comment. Anyone from the public want to speak to this item? E either item actually and you can throw three minutes for each. That's item P thirty-eight and P forty-three.
Presentation for the board.
Second. All in favor say aye. Aye.
Aye.
As usual, they do a wonderful job of their presentations. What they didn't mention to you. Excuse me, sir. Oh, yes, I'm sorry. Allen Rose, [address removed] and yes, I've been sworn in.
Thank you.
And uh they did a nice job. Something brought forward. is the connection to Rocky Sync. Rocky Sink already backs up and flows reverse because of all the development that's been in this area. I've been down there personally and watched it. I've sent you pictures of Rocky Sink flowing backwards. So with that happening, you're gonna flood out Cranes Roost, Bass Lake, and Golden Acres. Thank you very much. That's the important part of this because it's not being addressed.
A lot of people are not addressing the riparian flow of our waterways. And you're gonna see more and more flooding. I already have seen enough flooding at Golden Acres. It can all be fixed. But it's not being addressed. you know, uh Rocky Sink can have an alternative outflow, but it doesn't right now because it hasn't been addressed. the tangle would spill way spillway. You have a two foot difference in water flow from the top to the bottom, even with the gates open. Shouldn't be, because there's so many blockages in the Tanglewood spillway. This development
will put pressure on our side of the road because that's where we have a natural spillway out to Rocky Sink. then also to our east, Like developing tanglewood, we'll see the water sub s the riparian flow being pressured to them, and since the tanglewood spillway is non-functional. Tanglewood will flood out. That's my point. And I gave you a presentation. This presentation will apply to others throughout the throughout the county. I've I've been out to Dade City. I've witnessed the same similar activities happen in Dade
City. And quite often, you know, you have all of the uh beautiful Drainage ditches and whatnot designed. They're designed to contain the pollution in accordance with DEP regulations. There is no nothing out there that I have found yet. That's addressing the riparian flows and the additional flow that we're going to be encountering, especially in my neighborhood. Thank you.
Anyone here to speak to this item?
Um on that on those comments on those comments that he was making, I th I seem to recall um when Commissioner Weight was up here, they did a lot of work on that in that area. Drain it work on. Rock what do you call it? Rocky something.
As I recall, part part of Magnolia Valley was going to be able to actually build it, the way we're gonna build it actually w we'd be able to hold water coming from the east or the west. So that could actually take some water from this area here. Um I c I can say, Alan, if you if you watch the apartments on uh Ridge Road up there that were being built in the Tanglewood entryway. I did have there was one area there was like a a wetland that was kinda low. Uh I did have it checked out thoroughly. David Allen did a great job with his team. And there wasn't a connection to Rock Sank. It was just a s just a low
area where the water drained too.
That connects to the Tangowood spillway, not the Rocky Sink.
Well and I I but I will address I will address I brought you up the this the Tangowood spillway. We will take a look at that. But that's that one area I had some calls on it that I did look at.
And that should that should appropriate handle. handle that section. But it's gonna cause a lot more pressure and Tanglewood's gonna see some of the things that we're gonna be happy.
I'd be happy to work with you in Brantford to go look at that and study that issue where it's off to make sure we can if there's the correct ability to to correct that.
Thank you. Right. And we are we are flo already flooding across Ridge Road on the other side because that's a natural spillway for us. That's how it was built and designed. And you can go over there and watch the flow go under Rage Road. Go back to the mic so we can pick you up, sorry. You c you can go and watch the the flow. From Tanglewood, Bass Lake. You can watch that flow going to tangl going to Rocky Sink. But because of all the developments that's been to the south of Rocky Sink now, it doesn't naturally flow like it used to. It fills up fast and then it reverses
course and it floods back in. I watched all the l all of the uh docks in Bass Lake go underwater and I watched homes, we all have acreage, okay? And I watched everyone dealing with their their livestock. And I'm
just not happy. And the cross connection of Tim Rokes
with
you, but if you would get with Colleens Okay. Thanks. All right, so no one else to speak to this item. We'll close public comment. No one online? No, sir. Okay. So to the board. Move approval. First on. First item would be P thirty eight.
Ron. Excuse me, I want to make sure that the motion includes the uh addition of the street treatment
that
would be the second one.
P thirty each land use first. I have a motion from Commissioner Oakley. Yeah.
Second.
And a second, Commissioner Starkey. Roll
call vote. District 1, Commissioner Oakley. Aye. District 2, Commissioner Starkey Wakeman.
Aye.
District 3, Commissioner Starkey. Aye. District 4, Commissioner Yeager. Aye. District 5, Commissioner Mariano. Aye. I'll
go P item P forty three. Um Mr. Chairman, before you take a motion, let's get the conditions bringed out. Um Barbara, I'm looking at 10A. Yeah, that's already in your conditions. Um
I'm I know what you want to do. Let me get there. Um which reads each single family detached lot shall have a minimum of two s two trees on or in front of the lot, one of which may be on the side or backyard and one of which must be in the front of the home. Strike but may The either and say additionally a street tree Shall be in the front of the lot.
That is not a crepe myrtle.
Or under story
two.
Yeah. Did that work for you?
Yeah, is that so are we requiring three trees?
I thought that was the offer.
I know I was trying trying to grab my my engineer.
So yeah, so I I left the minimum of two trees and then have additionally A Canopy street tree.
Additionally there shall be a canopy street tree tree. Or
is that shade tree? That's that's how street cut.
Jeremy Couch, Tampa Civil, I
have
been sworn. Um so um Mr. Steinsnyder, I'm thinking it should say each single family detail attached lot shall have a minimum of three trees. And then um you gotta do more work if you do that.
No, that's what they have to say.
Street tree Located between the back of curb and face of sidewalk.
Mm-hmm. Okay, now so you raise the question to me. Um What What do we define as a tree?
You you have a definition in your land development code, Commissioner, for what shade trees are versus ornamental trees?
Okay.
So there's a specific list of
species.
I don't think those categorize as shade trees.
No, I'm not saying shade tree. I'm talking about the one that could be in the back or the front, the other ones. What are those?
So
I mean are you gonna tell me a Lugustrum counts or uh
Patrick's coming
up. Great Myrtle.
Okay.
Um I just shocked myself. Uh Patrick Detter, Planning and Development, Development Review Director. Um so lot trees are required to be shade trees. Okay. And we have uh in the development manual a list of different categories of trees, shade trees, ornamental trees, palm trees. So they will have to be of the shade tree variety.
Uh did you say sh a pa palm tree was it?
Palm tree is a separate category. There are larger palms that can be counted as shade tree, but no single family home is gonna buy one of those very large expensive palms to count as their shade tree. So
Okay. Um All right. That was my question. So which definition do you want? Which
which definition do we w are we gonna
go with
though? Your definition is it with it is within your code and I wouldn't I wouldn't change it for a specific condition. You need to go back and change your land development code if you don't
think
that was okay.
I think that the what Jeremy proposed is fine.
So it it would just be Um it would designate a minimum of three trees. One of one of which would be a Shade a canopy or
shade is the word.
A shade is the word he used. A shade shade street tree.
That is so are you saying the others can be No, I d I don't think I think that is not the code. Let me hear him say what the code is. Then I need to
I I think Jeff was just being specific too the code already requires those lot trees to be shade trees. I think Jeff was also just specifically clarifying that the additional street tree also needs to be a shade tree.
I promise we'll get this wording right. Okay, remember that wording
because it's coming on
whatever else is coming. Did you want to put rid the location where he said Of the tree or no?
All right, so let's do this. So on for P forty three, we're gonna look for the condition from the county attorney to be stated, then we'll look for a motion.
Oh.
Or you can leave it to the county attorney to approve after Your motion, the actual language. I think they
do a really good job. They can they ha they have to have three trees, one of which they're all shade, one of which is a street tree, one can be in the front or the side, and the other one has to be in the back.
Is that your motion?
Is that your message? Am I
right? Yes.
Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opponents? Rowe calling it.
No.
No, no. Thank you, Commissioner.
I do think we should add that to our code though.
Yes, I agree. I I I an engineer brought that to my attention that we were not requiring speech.
A flawed not a closure.
It's the the exhibit. It's it's exhibited J. Yeah. All right.