R-54 MPUD residential lot policy memorandum
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
What was said
Machine transcription of 47m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 88% of 215 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
R what? Fifty-four. Fifty-four. It's the M P D
Good morning, Madam Chair. Uh Niktario Pito's Planning and Development Department. Uh uh today I'll present to you the single family residential lots and MPUDs. policy memorandum that was requested of the Board of County Commissioners at the October 26, 2021 BCC meeting, wherein whereat the board wanted the Planning and Development Department to be directed to address certain issues associated with single family residential lots. in MPUDs
specifically. So
So the memo is divided into a number of parts and so what I'll do is I'll just walk through the memorandum uh as shown on the slides uh uh or as summarized on the slides here. And then um I'll be done with the presentation and we can have a discussion regarding the proposed policy memorandum. So part one of the policy memorandum. And I and let me mention too that the the purpose of the policy memorandum is to uh disseminate it to the planning and development department staff in order for them to have a unified approach in the
negotiations for uh residential developments uh through the MPUDs. uh that are applied to the to the department. So Part one of the memorandum deals with minimal lot width controls. And what part one sets out is that any MQD may may allow 40 foot wide lots. However, there's a 50% threshold. that was determined together with uh industry stakeholders uh and staff. And what that threshold means
is that up to fifty percent of the lots that are forty feet wide may be front loaded, leaving the other half to require uh rear loaded or alley loaded product. Uh and what that will do then is that half of the development will will have more green space in the front of the buildings because their driveways and their garages will be to the rear. of uh of each lot. Uh and in order for us to facilitate and help the alley loaded or rear-loaded
development, because it will require the the construction of extra alleys. infrastructure. Um We are extending the uh traditional neighborhood design mobility fee incentive uh to those projects to help offset the costs of the additional infrastructure. Uh part two of the memo talks about architectural controls. And I've highlighted this one uh provision here on the slide because that's a a question that
needs to be posed to the BCC. But if I can make my way through the presentation and then we we can return to this question. Um and ask it uh of each board member that we'd uh I think that would be useful. Um so the policy question that's before the Board of County Commissioners is are the architectural controls which include the placement of houses, meaning the type of model or elevation type that can be built to the left and to the right of a proposed home or across the street from a proposed
home or kitty corner to a proposed home. Uh can the establishment uh uh of at least three architectural features that create distinctions and differentiations between the architecture and also the amount of garages extending more than eight feet beyond the roof line. Are those applicable to all single family residential lots or just forty foot wide lots? And as an alternative Uh Are may they be applicable to
f forty-foot-wide lots and fifty-foot-wide lots? So that's the policy question that remains on the table following. uh a series of stakeholder discussions with with industry stakeholders. Um part three of the memorandum talks about the conditions of approval specific to the question of the monotony and architectural controls that I just referenced. Um During the construction phase. We're going to establish conditions of approval that require quarterly reporting on the
part of the developers. to demonstrate and illustrate how they are avoiding monotony by instituting these architectural controls. Uh once construction is done, then the conditions of approval kick in to require homeowners associations to maintain these monotony and architectural features controls. And HOAs are a typical organization that facilitate the architectural appearances of communities. The conditions of approval will also require that
deed restrictions be established on these properties. So in the unfortunate event in HOA. goes defunct. There are still deed restrictions placed on the property for proper code enforcement to take place. Uh part four of the memorandum deals with trees in single family residential areas. So these provisions are already in use in some of the most recent MPUDs that have come before the Board of County Commissioners. So we've already kind of pre-tested them. uh in the run up to this policy memorandum. Uh importantly outlined
in the memorandum is that front loaded single family detached products shall require one lot tree and one street tree in front in the front yard. uh front loaded single family attached with four or fewer units in a townhouse building, for example, Um we'll have two trees in the front yard and our street. And then five or more units, three trees in the front yard and our street. And there is also provision to require the uh shade trees to be established
on those properties. And then finally, uh an arc uh an engineering detail is provided in the uh In the memorandum to uh not require driveway flares to accommodate uh the spaces between sidewalks and curb edges for tree plantings. Driveway flares are when the driveways flare out to uh to facilitate turning radii.
Uh part five of the memorandum talks about townhouse lot considerations specifically and the two main provisions there are uh to limit townhouse buildings to two to eight units per building. The idea there being that we don't want townhouses that are 10, 12, or longer uh units long. Uh instead break those buildings apart and create green spaces between those buildings uh for to to address the landscaping uh concerns that
were expressed at the October 26th meeting. And then attached in your uh handout in your packet is an exhibit showing an example configuration of how townhouse uh driveways, front loaded driveways, uh can reach towards the street and still provide the necessary green spaces and tree plantings in front of the buildings so that you don't have a sea of uh well not maybe not a sea but a a large expanse of driveway pavement in the
front of a building. Part six of the memorandum is uh basically direction toward the planning and development department requesting f a feasibility white paper. Uh uh to look at residential streets and alleys and see what opportunities there are to optimize the code. And then also it provides um direction with regard to alternative standards, the type of alternative standards we'll support in order to accomplish the provisions and the vision
uh outlined in the in the policy memorandum. Uh part seven of the memo is with regards to applicability to MPDs currently in review. And there's a number of exemptions that are identified in the Memorandum. Existing MPUDs are being uh exempted. So if there's uh already been something that's been approved, if they come in for a modification, uh this would be uh those modifications would be exempt from applicability from this memo since a number
of planning and financial decisions have already been likely executed by the time a modification comes in. We don't want to disturb or disrupt that. Um there's also an exemption from part one of the memorandum. uh which had to do with the forty foot lot uh size limitations. Uh four, the villages of Pascoadina Hills, Connected City, the Central Pasco Employment Village, Avalon Park, West M PD and Newport or Newport Corners. Well
these exemptions are in place because there are already uh documents that govern the design and density requirements. And there there's in some cases like in B O P H there's a financial plan that depends on a certain type of density to be accomplished. Um so these special areas uh are being uh sort of carved out from this memorandum. Just from part one of the memorandum. The architectural tr entry provisions, etcetera, are still applicable. Um And then finally, there's
an exemption for multifamily, mainly because this memorandum deals with single family development. Uh but I want to include also uh multi-unit detached housing, which is uh basically what we what we've seen in some proposals where we have a single large parcel of land that has multiple detached products on it that is technically classified by the land development code as multifamily, even though it's one family
per detached unit that's living on that on that project. It's Mm. Probably more commonly been called horizontal apartments as opposed to vertical apartments. And then the last part of the memorandum is a six month assessment. So Uh the memorandum talks a lot about conditions of approval being added to MPUDs and how to uh account for and control for all the things that I've just talked about. Uh it's going to take negotiation and a bit of testing to see the different
uh scenarios that we have to apply these provisions. And so by October we should be we should have we should have a number of negotiations under our belt to and and should have been able to test a lot of these conditions of approval in a in a series of situations. And we can make an assessment at that time to see whether or not the provisions work. What needs to be changed? and what can be now added into the land development code uh as a standard. So having completed
the presentation, I'll go back to the last remaining issue before uh the board. The Planning and Development Department worked closely with industry stakeholders that include uh land use attorneys, the Tapabay Builders Association, and other developers to negotiate this policy memorandum and we've done we've been doing that since the February eighth BCC meeting. Um this is the last item that has uh been unresolved, so
to speak, because it is sort of a policy question. The Board of County Commissioners Yeah. told us uh in a in a clear way whether or not they intended or you all intended for the architectural controls to be applicable to all single family residential or just the forty foot wide lot. single family residential or the forty foot wide and fifty foot wide lot r single family residential. And that'll be a little bit more. I'll leave it with that question.
Board members? Anyone want to start? Commissioner Oakley?
Okay. I think we determined we talked about it with the stakeholders there in a meeting. Um that if you went to larger lar lots throughout then the architectural because you'd be spending more money on a home, the architectural kinda takes care of itself. So you don't mess reactor. Tell 'em they want it different from the house next door. But on forty foot lots. It's very important we make sure it's done the right way. But as you get
to sixty footlights and others people that are spending more money on their home. They care about the architectural view and they don't want What somebody's got next door or across the street. So
how would you someone Someone may want a bigger yard but the same house. That w just because they have a sixty foot wide lot doesn't mean they're gonna pick a larger house. No, that's right. So I think it needs to stay with the house, not the lot size.
Yeah, but the fact of it is uh If you got a larger lot and you build your home, you're gonna be
Mm-hmm. You may or may not build a larger house.
Yeah, you could build the same size home. You're just gonna pay more attention 'cause you're gonna probably put more into that smaller home. And you're gonna pay more attention to you don't want your house the same as the one on either side of you. I think across the street.
I think it should be generic to the house. I don't care what size it is, it need I don't think it should only be a house on a forty foot wide lot. Otherwise
I mean you could get a fifty foot lot and Say it's a corner lot and it's a little bigger, but then you get a house with no none of the
requirements
of architectural.
Most of the wider lots are getting bigger houses. I think that's what we see in
Thank you, Madam Chairman Mariano. You know, I think with the the smallest the forties and the fifties, I think the architectural is is critical. I think it ni as you get to the bigger ones Generally speaking, I'm not gonna have the same color house as my neighbor. I mean you could work some neighborhoods and some neighborhoods are nice, like Heritage Springs, they're g they're all exactly the same color, exactly the same thing.
Right.
Um but that's probably by their own restrictions. I think with most of the development so most people want to have their own controls. They're gonna have this different roof styles, et cetera, and probably gonna build a different house to to some degree. So I I think there's enough variation there. I think the smaller ones, some of the neighborhoods I've driven in That are on these forties and fifties and they just like It just it's it's gonna look terrible down the road. So I'm okay with forties and fifties, but I think the the larger ones will be all right.
I think I think what you'll end up seeing if you're What you're saying is true is you'll see even more architectural features and Uh but I I think we should s keep them to say that they should at least have three of Pick from they should have a minimum of three. But Oh, you mean for
all the lots? Yeah. Minimum.
Why yeah.
Yeah. Well our our thought basic wasn't on necessarily our thought was the bigger lots were gonna be different anyway. So
But
what we would be doing is saying you don't have to have pick from any architectural details, right? If we don't put this on a If we're going by the lot size and not the structure.
Right. If if we go by the lot size and say this is applicable only to the forty-four-wide lots, then only the forty-four-wide lots would look at the provisions established. In the menu. And
that could happen with the developer, I guess, uh. Ow. I wouldn't think it would, but I think it's not a good thing Yeah. So maybe you do want to have some kind of uh a guidance on architectural no matter what the size lot is, knowing that the larger lots are gonna do it anyway. But put something there that kinda states you will keep in mind to use different architectural views of houses on the larger lots. Something in it. forces the issue to be
that instead of you get three people, oh, I want the same house, oh, I want the same look, I want the same I mean if you got that then it would It wouldn't look as good if s if you kind of put some kind of uh guidance for that architectural view.
Yeah, and I I think I think that happens um anyway, so I don't think that's a that we're asking too much to say that you should also have some architectural restrictions on a larger lot. Yeah. The industry's not gonna object to that because they're gonna be a good idea.
I think on the bigger lots you're you're gonna get better architectural views and different ones because the people are gonna be building a bigger house, a different house and And they're gonna want it not to be like those across the street. I think that's normal. But we should make sure that we're not going to be able to do that. They don't just build the same model in those bigger lots. So And same architecture view.
All right. So there's there's something that um I wanted to uh talk about here and that is the driveways in townhomes. And I'm we're trying to do some research.
Can I show me one more comment to the robot thing? And we'll get to that because I want to talk about that too. Right. You know, one thing I want I'd like to do is For those that want to build the larger homes, those are the more desirable homes, the better I think, for for long term for Pasco. I mean the affordable ones Let's make 'em look good. And I would like to encourage them to have the larger lots to go through because I think when you can put more than two cars in a driveway is probably a good thing. When you have a bigger lot, it it it provides for I think for a better tax base and and better quality of life for kids that are gonna live
in the neighborhood. So I want to make sure we give them the flexibility to do what what they want if they're going to build larger. The the the problem is when you see these smaller lots are so tight and they're identical all the way through. That's the ones that I think are gonna really and and playing for down the road. So that's why I think the forties and fifties, I'm I'm good to focus on those. I'd love to keep the freedom to encourage them to build the larger lots on the others.
But But you can st still put a smaller house on a sixty foot it shouldn't be the size of the lot. It should go by what we want as a minimum on any house that's built here in Pasco County. It's not the size of the lot.
See what I'm saying?
I understand what you're saying.
Right. So it it if they're gonna put a bigger house and they're gonna put more detail on it. Am I missing something here?
Well um if I might be able to do it. The memorandum identifies a minimum of three features. that establishes, at least from the planning and development departments or the counties perspective, a differentiation between architecture of one house Compared to the neighboring house. I think it's true that as you get a larger lot you'll it's likely that they'll build a larger house which will demand
additional architectural features. the marketplace will will make that demand. I also think that because the threshold is fairly low at three, they'll probably meet that anyway.
I I agree. So why is it so s strenuous to put it in? I mean I don't think it's any issue, but if we don't have it in Some people gonna dive to the bottom. Sorry.
Do we want someone to build a large house with no architectural features? Do we?
No, that's n that's not a
minimum of three. Let's have a minimum of three.
But let's at least raise the bar from zero to three.
I'll understand. Well,
I
think it's gonna happen
anyway.
But how and
how do you enforce the neighborhoods where it didn't happen?
All
right,
so let's get to it. How do you enforce it all down the road?
They they submit a plan.
So let's uh let's say uh ten years down the road, I'm I'm gonna go buy one of these houses with a sixty foot lot. It's got a different look than my neighborhood.
Have it my way. But I gotta go check with deed restrictions, go see what the guy next door is done, et cetera. It's a difficult road. And if I've got the freedom to b I bought just bought a single family house and I gotta go worry about what my guy did, if I like his shutters, even though I'm gonna do a different color. Or whatever. Uh I mean I just I just I I think we're going too strong with it.
Yeah, that's all. Question more? No opinion?
I that's not liking it calling
him out.
I I I'm just on the guest list of this party.
Hey, you're not checked out yet.
No, no, no, I no, I know no no I I did since I didn't know.
No,
I I'm
just l I'm taking it all in. I didn't initiate this, obviously, so I'm uh I'm listening to all sides and taking it all in. I had my meeting with staff and obviously the stakeholders too. But like I said, um, Uh um, since um I didn't uh start the party, I'm just kinda people watching right now.
All right. Well I I I just think it's not a high bar to ask for a minimum of three. Am I are we talking about more than that? More than three are we talking about something different than other requir other than requiring at least three architectural features on a house in an MPUD?
It would be the whatever the provisions are in the memorandum. So I think the answer to that would be is it more? No, it's the it would be the same.
So why so I don't underst I I don't understand the hesitation. It's it should be the house and not the lot size. Okay. Commissioner
Ye if we uh if we have a development, they're gonna give us three three or five architectural views for every house in there, right? And normal.
Um Usually.
Usually that
usually that's what the marketplace would need.
Right.
You know, they want to serve at least three to five
If that's in the in the plan for um the beginning and you're required to have different residential views. Person coming in with a lot could have a different architectural view. than any of those if they choose so on a bigger lot. Right.
Or they have to go by the five views that you have architectural agreement on.
Um I'm not sure I I understand the question.
Well I mean a developer if he's if he's going in there and just sticking up houses long He's gonna make that change to where architecturally this is that way. But If you have a person want to come in and build a custom house on a larger lot. That person's gonna wanna maybe wanna pick something that's not pre arranged for an architectural view for all he could have. On a certain lot. Building a house.
Well I would say that if you're going to build a custom house, the chances of you different being different from from others around you is higher.
Right.
Yeah.
Architectural views for all lots. And when you get larger lots and people want a certain view and they want something different than What can't they do that with a developer and they'll still fit in the plan for A different architectural view?
Yeah, m most developers, but not all, most developers will offer choices for the homeowner. You can have a certain model to choose from.
Right.
You can have elev different elevations on that model to choose from. Then you can actually choose to incorporate uh you know different features and extensions to the house, three-car garage, you know, outdoor kitchen, that sort of thing. Um which can influence the architecture of the building. Okay. Um But that's not all builders.
All right, Madam Chair, I'm
ready. Okay.
Please join
in. So So here's a question. Let's talk a little bit. I think it was Commissioner Mariano that brought up a second ago. Maybe it was you, Madam Chair. Uh oversight. Talk about your oversight. I'll ask probably this probably has to go to Sally. Um I would assume that you're gonna need additional FTEs to m to manage this as well.
Good morning, Commissioner Sally Sherman, Assistant County Administrator for Development Services. There's going to have to be as we worked with the development community to bring forward any M PUDs that have these lots, we're going to put the honus on them to come up with some type of plans and you can that because we've talked about it, we've been trying to figure out how to get this done if it's approved, come up with a plan
system that they're going to submit what type of design package they're going to allow on different lots. So it may change their marketing strategy with regard to as they have individuals come in and select a lot, this is the type of house that has to go on that lot and if you don't want that one you may have to select another one. I think it would be um It would create a lot of challenges if builders
are going to come in and just simply submit a package and we're gonna have staff determine which home was built on the lot adjacent to either side of it. It i I think it's gonna be too onerous on us, so we're gonna put the honors on them to present the packages as they get 'em approved.
If I might add to Sally's comments, that would would be part of the quarterly reporting that I didn't noted in the uh in the memorandum. Um right, because the builder is going to make a selection of model and architecture based on based on the uh.
Yeah. Bay based on the purchase agreement with the home buyer P in most cases. And so then they have to report back to us to say that when they've met when they've come to such agreements In this quarter we sold X amount of houses and all of the houses were different from each other and here's the proof.
I uh you know, I like most of you, I met with a lot of builders and um And we've been developers, our family And this is commonly done. I mean you rarely build the same model next to each other. And uh I mean it's very common that when you have one house and then person is building the house next door They change up the features a little bit. They put the door on the right, they put A gable or a change in the Yeah, I mean that that that is not anything big to ask
of anyone. Yeah,
it's
very common.
Again, just my yeah, my question was again, where's the oversight? Where's this is it sounds to me it's more of a um No, we trust ya. Yeah. Type of situation. Pardon me?
Uh self reporting from the development community.
In their marketing scheme I think they're gonna have to choose right ones and allow. some changes in elevation so people buying the lot are gonna be happy with what they're they're receiving. Shit. I think the marketplace actually handles some of that.
But but think about the situation. You you go in development and let's say there's nineteen homes built and you got the twentieth one and you're right in the middle. And one's got some features you like, the other one's got features you like, and you wanna You want to make your decision what you want to build and buy and now you're not going to be able to You're you're stuck in that situation. And I'm and again I'm just talking about the sixties, the forties and fifties I'm good with, but I I just think we're gonna be Too much. And then what if the HOA down the road goes defunct? You're gonna have it indeed restrictions. Who's going to enforce the deed restrictions?
So do you want to do something like this? Just say that um because what I'm really concerned about. uh a house has a minimum of three architectural details and I would say For the most part. I mean everyone's gonna on y you would hope everyone would have some, um but
that take out all the other requirements that are in here. Um about the um paint or whatever, but just say a house And Pasco County must have a minimum of three architectural details.
And never mind if it matches your next door neighbor.
What's
what's
what's
the
list of
the
list of the architectural details we're talking about?
Oh yeah, there's a whole paragraph of a whole bunch to choose from. Let's put them up, let's look at them. You have them on your on your own. Report the architectural details.
Yeah, the the memorandum can be found. online on the uh In the agenda packet information on the agenda. Do you have that, Desiree? Yeah. So we'll load them up in uh just a minute here.
I see we got one person who was on the call. Dark hobbies out there. I see Jennifer from T B B A is here as well. Maybe we should hear from them when we're looking at this.
Yeah, but go um you can pull those up.
Oh um we normally don't take
Yeah and I don't I didn't see here any push back on requiring a minimum of three architectural details from anybody. So that's why I don't think it's an issue to add it to the sixty.
I think they do it anyway. I live in a neighborhood right now that's uh 50 foot lots. And I would think there's at least five different architectural differences on homes. And none of the s none of the same homes sit beside each other across the street.
Didn't he have the presentation mark?
I Madam Chair, I think and I can just get a head nod out there. Yeah. Typically when we she's talking about different architectural details. If you're if you're going into a Can you move to your left just a little bit?
Sorry.
Um you're good.
Wait, now you're black and me from the head on
When you you're going into a new community and you're looking uh like Madam Chair s stated about different architectural details. When you see that listing, it's typically d listed as different elevations. They call it elevation.
Right.
On that. And yes, you do have those typically in most neighborhoods, especially these master plane communities, are yes, you do have choices, right, of those different elevations. But to Why I Don't know what the policy well that's up to the chair if she if if she allows somebody from the audience to speak, so that's up to her.
Yeah. And I d I don't mind l allowing them to speak. Okay, then come on
up.
But look look at the paragraph here. We're talking about the style of the garage door, a shutter and um a little bit of brick. You know, verse I mean, yeah. Brick. Stone, stucco. Hardy Plank. I mean there's so many to choose from. I don't think it's ever gonna be an issue, but we should at least Have three details. Okay.
It map Good morning, Commissioner. Jennifer Motzinger representing the Tampa Bay Builders Association. The conversation was had with the stakeholders and the staff. uh and it was in-depth. The real issue that we uh were concerned about is the fact that this kind of already takes care of itself and so it puts a lot more pressure on the staff. And essentially you're do kinda doing double work. So your the staff is already reviewing uh the plans in the process and then they're doing this extra layer which
they've already kind of done. and because the bigger lots have all of the bells and whistles that you guys like anyway Uh why why regulate something to regulate it just for the sake of the regulation to regulate? That's a s a real simplified summary of of the lengthy discussion. But uh Chairman, to your to your point, of course, we we understand generally speaking, you want a a better product in in Pasco County, and that's what we're trying to deliver
for you. That's the goal. But do you think that having different rules for for different size lots makes it more confusing for staff? Shouldn't it be consistent across a forty, fifty, or sixty? Because now they're gonna have to say, Oh, I'm looking at a sixty, not a fifty, so the rules are different. So I think it makes it harder for staff.
Madam Chairman, if I if I might, that we were tasked with dealing with a 40-foot lot issue and townhouse issues. And so we were dealing with those issues with MPUDs. And there was discussion uh with the stakeholders about applying the architectural features to 50-foot lots. And again, there's some similarity in building type. on those lots and so we don't deny that we should be stepping up those issues, but I I think we're trying to avoid
creating a bigger paperwork issue for the county and the building community going on for forever on lots that are really not a problem. The perceived problems was 40-foot lots. We broadened it to 50 We just don't want to have to keep going on this forever and ever. And I'd I'd say this, I think you said you had something you wanted to discuss about townhouses. The way Terry has designed this memo, remember this is to apply and give staff direction on MPUDs. They're going to we're going to come back and look at this again
in six months. If there's something else we need to look at, if it's a problem in six months, we'll bring it up then. But I had worked really hard with our different stakeholders to reach a consensus on today's stuff and I really would prefer not to go beyond that for today. Maybe the next round. That's my thought on it.
Well, um what's Clark's referring to, because I let 'em know ahead of time that um Uh and I had my my meeting last week and after my meeting we we continued with our discussion about the width of driveways for single car garages and then I made some phone calls And got more affirmation that we may not want to be allowing a two car driveway for a single car garage. So um I'm trying to do my research I'm
trying to do my research to see what other counties do, but um Um And can you show the last picture I sent you that shows a two car driveway with a single car garage?
Before we get to that, can I can I dive into this just one more one quote? So
can you put that up?
When someone's Building a new house or buying a new house. There's a whole list of things to pick from, correct? Do you want this? Do you want this? Do you want this? Thirty items on that list? The chances of people picking twenty seven out of thirty the same. Probably slim than none. So there's gonna be some differences built in anyway on these and again I'm I'm going to the sixty footers. You're not gonna build the same house side by side anyway. And I think if someone sees it, they may shift their colors even at
some point in time. But
Sure, sure. And remember folks, we are still living in supply chain issue world. So uh I know uh I have some friends that just built homes in the last year and somebody couldn't get stone, so they had to go to a different facade and they couldn't get this, so they had to go with that. So Building in that flexibility, I mean just think about just that item itself. Going back to staff saying, Sorry, we're out of stone. We're not gonna get stoned for another sixteen months. What can we do here? Those are the conversations that we were
having uh that led us to where we are now.
Okay, so I guess I'm the only one that wants every house to have an architectural detail. But you know I studied here in Design College and That's where I come from. I I think we all want it. I'll m I'll move on from that. But I will send you some I'm gonna show you some pictures of some houses that we have that have no architectural detail. Chris
And I was gonna ask if is there a specific neighborhood or specific development or a specific area that you don't want to see repeated.
Well I I I'm gonna show you some pictures. But um I'll move on from that one. I'm not gonna beat a dead horse. But I wanna talk to you about driveways. So um where's the picture? I sent it to you. I sent you two. One's a video actually. And one oh no, it I sent you two pictures. Um No, I took a picture of a video. Let's see here. Uh Dan Biles, Dan Biles.
Oh well I don't know how else to do it.
I don't know how to get it to them.
Yeah. Um But the second one is the one I want, that's Union Park.
It's because I I was trying to find I was trying to do research on townhomes and driveways. And it's very hard to do. I mostly got ads on how to do a driveway.
So it's it's they're both in process. Price go to China and back to get from my computer to her computer.
Okay. Um so So what I was thinking um for today was to just take out the driveway with discussion today and bring it back Um Bring it back. Uh And we can do do it as an amendment to this memo or whatever. Does that work? Yeah,
Madam Chair, I th I think l let me for the other board members, I'm not sure they know what you're talking about, so let me try to explain. I think Commissioner Starkey is bringing up an issue whether it's appropriate to have two car wide driveways where you have a single car. Garage and some builders do that. And part of what's happening with these standards is there will be so many landscaping requirements in the front yard that we'll have to alternate the ones who want two two-car
wide stalls, if you will, and one to fit all the trees in. So I personally think the issue will solve itself. Having said that, this has a six month period for us to look at this. I understand the the Chairman's concerned about it and I'd prefer that we keep talking with staff and and and we'll speak individually with board members and if something needs to be addressed. We can address it then. I I do know and I would say for the board's member uh for the board's benefit, there
are several builders that do this and they're responding to market demands. So I haven't had enough of a conversation with all of them to just take a position one way or the other, other than to tell you I think it would be problematic if we don't discuss it further. So I prefer to have that opportunity.
Well there is nothing we're doing today that says you can or cannot do that. So my point is the next round would address that issue, which I think is what you're
trying to
do.
Commissioner Mariano. Yes, Madam Chairman I mean if you look at neighborhoods are going to evolve over time too. And that's what we're I think we're concerned about these standards, and that's why I think it is so critical to put them in, especially the smaller lots. If you drive down to Embassy Park, Regency Park, take a look. That was senior communities homes built for what, seven grand or something, they said way back when in the sixties when they were first coming down. Um And you've got now families that have moved in there. and instead of having two cars in the driveway, maybe one in the garage which is full 'cause you got stuff and a lot of those get
converted, you get 'em parking on the dirt, the grass, et cetera. And it just Dist to me destroys the quality of what the neighborhood is. So My daughters lived in a place like that up in Orlando when they were both at at UCF in Valencia. And there's like One one garage. Two cur two and let's say you got three three girls living in there. One's in the street, one's in the garage, and the other one's gotta go try to find a spot. And the the the the the moving around, et cetera, was very, very difficult across the board if you didn't have plenty
of spots around for extra.
Well that brings up my next point, and that is that Um and when I first got elected I had to deal with this and I'm gonna I'm trying to pull up a a map here to see if I could take a shot of it. But um behind Trinity Town Center Um there was a townhome uh product built. And um the residents were going at it because There was no place for them to park. So um And they had to do that. And so we we didn't have any they had a few ancillary
parking spaces, like if you have a guest come, but the if you have two adults and a teenager You know, w they were b all parking halfway into the street. Um so I just think
Uh they need to have other parking spaces besides your driveway. I mean you cannot concrete I just think this you cannot concrete the whole front. I that that's just not what we want. There needs to be other parking spaces in the community. if you're gonna have this kind of product. And what that ratio is, I don't know. I'm sure that other counties and other communities have rules on that. Um but and we need to have some too. So we need to have more parking spaces.
I I again I appreciate the the the comments. Today the goal was just to help better beautify and deal with landscaping on the frontage and with the monotony controls. So we're stepping up our game on those initial issues. We'll continue having this conversation about because I th uh the tension I hear Commissioner Mariano on one hand is saying, well it's better to have more available parking if you can on the lot. But on the other hand, I think he's also realizing that we've got to keep the landscaping out
front too. So it's a there's a natural tension there. So let us keep working on it. I I would tell you all there's a lot of There's a lot of variability in product among different builders and then there's also a lot of variability between the lot sizes and you know varying them between a two-stall and a one-stall and a two-stall and a one stall to make it all fit and the engineers have to sit down and tell us what will fit. So I will continue
the conversation and We'll continue to be engaged with our engineering folks and try to come up with something that works for all.
Madam Chairman Mariano. Um in the definition of the shade tree. Um One of the things we had with some of the neighborhoods that I think Ballantry came comes to mind where they put Shade trees next to the dri next to the sidewalk. sidewalk and ruin the sidewalk. We see it all you see it all all over the county now. I wanna make sure we're not gonna be locked into the having that type of tree go in there. I mean a palm tree you can put that down You don't have a root tree, but you've got the root problems. So
what we determined in this process is there's newer standards in the site development criteria and in the notes that require root barriers around those concrete features and other things so that hopefully that won't happen in the future. We didn't have that until the last year or so.
As long as you think it'll be effective.
Yeah, that's the engineers tell me they are. They keep the roots from going out wide and blowing the sidewalk out.
Okay.
Thank you. We appreciate everybody's input on it and we'll continue working together.
Um I thought I had another photo for you, but just since you already have it in there, can you pull put up that other photo? This is uh this is actually from Um Spokane, Washington. This is a rear loaded multifamily. um product. This is the driveway. It this is the alley. And this is what what their alleys look like for this um rear loaded product. I I have some more pictures from that development. It's outstanding. Um is that
what'd you say?
This is Spokane, Washington. Um You can see uh another multifam family product is down at the end of the driveway, uh end of the alley. Okay. All right, thanks. Um a question for you Terry. The uh some of the standards and some of the research that you did came from the city of Zephyrhills, is that correct? Yes. What do they require on townhomes?
In terms of Driveways and Landrice.
Well the the driveway issue wasn't one part of the Zephyrhills research that I did. The Zephyrhills research that I did had to do with the architectural features controls and also the uh some of the lot size concepts.
And where where how did they do the architectural controls? Is it
Well, the architectural controls that are in the memorandum are basically uh variations or iterations on the Zephyrhills code itself. So we've borrowed quite a bit from from the Zephyrhills code in that sense. As far as the townhouses uh go, that was a logistical conversation between staff and the stakeholders and some of the engineering uh groups that do frequent work in the county where we try to balance uh the discussion that you were just having, the pavement versus green space issue,
and what's the best way to go about doing that. And we had an exhibit as part of the memorandum. that only showed an example of what you can do to create green spaces on a townhouse site. And that's where the whole driveway discussion was emanating from.
Okay. Okay. Um so do we a do we take action on this? Okay. All right. Are are you guys uh wanting to leave the driveways as they are now and revisit it later?
Yeah. Yep.
All right, so let's get a motion.
Need a motion. Okay.
Okay, I'll make a motion that we leave it as right now and we'll revisit this in the future. Do we need to give a certain date or no you're gonna make a motion on this item That off.
Confirm the proposed language of the attached policy memorandum and direct planning and development to to begin implementation of the policy guidance. I
am going to bring brack the driveways, but I'm going to do my research.
Okay. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay.
Mm-hmm. I there was a question that you needed to answer as to I don't know. I think in the memo it's still questions whether this applied to the five years of the easement. I
think the Chair dropped
the sixty
foot discussion. I mean that's the way I I took the consensus. But yeah. I'm good. I'm good.