Public comment on Rangeland preferred alternative
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 42m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 65% of 125 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Okay. We're gonna go to public comment now. Um Do you have lists to go first? I know Jane Graham is representing. Maybe she should go first and then maybe Dr. Blanco and a civic association person after that, and then we'll take the regulars. And if I could for everybody that's gonna speak, uh we need your name and address for the record. And if you could, if you need three minutes, take three minutes, but if you don't need it, let the other person go to save time and Get the other inputs in as well.
Yeah.
Good morning Commission. My name is Jane Graham and I'm an attorney and owner of Sunshine City Law, representing Bexley Community Development District. My address is one six seven zero three Early Riser Avenue, suite two hundred seventy two Landow Lakes, which is in Bexley. Bexley CDD has always been supportive of the Rangeland Boulevard Extension through proposed alternative A, and that's what provides the connection between Starkey and Bexley with four lanes
and no interchange on the Sun Coast. What you are being asked to approve today is something that has not previously been put forward doing the during the public workshops, which is a hybrid phased approach, which is preferred alternative that basically says, yes, we'll do some version of A first, but then we'll do Alternative B in the future. I want to talk to you about what do
we know about this pro preferred alternative A prefer sorry, preferred alternative. and what we don't know, because that should be helpful in you actually being able to make your determination. So what do we know? We know that The twenty fifty long range plan contemplated four lanes and the hundred and fifty million dollars. for the Rangeland Boulevard extension. It was never contemplated as a six-lane
plus extension. So the fact that people are saying like, oh yeah, this has been on the books forever. Yes, that's right, but it's been on the books for a four-lane divided improvement. What else do we know? We know that The ultimate preferred phase two, which is what you're asking to approve in this package, is very much not supported by the community. There was a poll. at the public workshops that shows Just exactly
what the sub alternatives are supported. And this is in the root study, and it shows alternative A, 85%, B, like 5%, C, somewhere around five to ten percent. So that really needs to tell you something about what the people who have been involved in this process care about and think about. What else? Do we know? We know that
portion which is with the interchange conflicts with the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan for Bexley North and South Guiding Principles specifically speaks to pedestrian-friendly, human-scale environment, connectivity, and walkability between uses and parcels. and maximum internal capture. This is inconsistent with that. This by asking to have this incursion into a very pedestrian, very
walkable area, that's not what this does. What else do we know? We know that the interchange is not currently
Something that F D OT is saying that they're going ahead with. We have emails with Greg Moore, who works with F D OT. He had not seen the preferred alternative or the other alternatives. I personally shared it with him, and he wrote back saying, and I sent you all a copy of this, saying, I have not seen this. And What they're saying is not inaccurate, but it implies a certainty that is not reflective of current thinking. And it's true that those ramps can
come in some day in the future, But That's not something that there are no plans to move forward with it at this time. So it's true, it's the county who is going to tell F DOT what they want. And you are getting lots of input. That eighty-five percent don't want this interchange. They want A. So what don't we know? What we don't know is how this will be funded, because what
mister Compo gave a presentation of showed that the different
The The different alternatives have different costs. Now, the preferred alternative ultimate, which by the way they say ultimate instead of you know option, which ask yourself why is it ultimate? That means that that is a final goal. But so the preferred alternative ultimate is $191 million. That's $50 million more than alternative A. thirty million dollars more than the others. And by the way, the cost of the long range plan for rangeland is $150 million.
So this is really going over and beyond what had been previously contemplated. What you also you don't know how this will be funded, and your staff report says funding is not required for this action. It will be presented for approval at a future meeting. When the when the price tag is this large, isn't that something you should talk about now? You also don't know how the new iteration will impact traffic in the area. And what hasn't been explained is
that this new preferred alternative has actually changed the location of the signals and ads aroundabout at South Branch. And the root study doesn't include that. So things like lane geometry and signal performance and intersection performance haven't been. The safety of existing neighborhoods cannot be sacrificed on behalf of unknown growth, which you have the full power to control. Thank you very much.
In lecture? Please don't clap. We're going to slow things down a little bit.
And I'm gonna bring this here if you wanna scan the QR code here.
Good morning. My name is Nancy Pettit. I um live at [address removed] in Bexley. Um I'm also on the C D D but I'm here kind of speaking as A passionate resident and also a CDD representative. It's funny, you watch movies and you hear them like say, I'm not gonna read what I wrote, I'm just gonna speak from the heart, but you know they actually planned it. I'm gonna really just try to speak from the heart. Um I have been a part
of multiple meetings with great representatives from the county, um, with people like Panos. Since day one. And I brought these signs with us here today because I wanted the community and especially you all to know that Bexley since day one has actually been in favor and understanding of option A or alternative A. I'm married to a civil engineer who, before we bought our house, did the due diligence of like, oh, a road's coming
here one day. But we knew that at that time the road had nothing to do with an option of an interchange connection to the to the Sun Coast. That is the biggest difference here that's happening today. I also just want to shed light on the different workshops. Workshop one, the public workshop that Panos mentioned, had two alternatives. They had A and B, as he mentioned. We then had a meeting that brought us to an alternative C option, which was included in the
next workshop. Of all of those, from day one, like I mentioned, our community was all about option A. And how many in here, if you have a sign and you're Here because of Bexley. Can you please stand and show your signs? Thank you.
On top of that, I know you guys were flooded with over 220 emails in less than a 20 24-hour period. I apologize it flooded your emails, but the whole point of that is we knew that people weren't gonna have the opportunity to come here because we are a neighborhood filled of parents that are full-time workers with children and can't come to a 10 a.m. four-hour meeting. That isn't a workshop, it's a full agenda for the Board of County Commissioners. The point here is that we've
never had an opportunity to ever examine this preferred alternative that is supposedly option A, but keeps the doors open for all the things in option B and C that we are not okay with. If you see on this sign, there's three main points that the community has been okay with. With since day one. It is keep the roundabout at the Bexley Village Drive, which yes, the preferred alternative has. It also says less lane, which is
really keeping it at the minimum of four lanes, which is what alternative A has. And finally, no interchange. I just want to make sure that when you all see in this proposed agenda today. That the recommended board action is to approve the study's preferred alternative. And yes, it mentions four lanes. It doesn't mention the interco- uh the interchange connection. But when you move over to the page four of seven of the same package that tells
you exactly what the preferred alternative includes, it It adds in six lanes for the future interchange connection for the future. As I mentioned, it keeps the doors open to all the things, and all we're asking is that we hold off on voting for this today so that the community can have public input, a public workshop after five o'clock on a day that people can make it. Thank you.
No clapping, please.
Please. Uh and if you want to line up behind him we'll just kinda take who's going under Dr. Blanco, won't you come after this gentleman?
Good morning. My name is Jeremy Pettit. I have the privilege to be married to my brilliant and uh very passionate wife, Nancy. I reside at [address removed] uh in Bexley. Um I'm a civil engineer. I'm I'm a resident of Bexley, but I also own a civil engineering business here in Pasco County. So I understand a lot of the terms being thrown out here and I want to kind of define two terms. I have a lot to get to, so I'm just gonna jump right into it. A lot of people have said I'm gonna repeat what people have said. Collector and arterial. Those are two terms used in the engineering roadway design industry to define roads, volume,
traffic. So, the vision plan, I'm glad you guys brought that up. That has been shown since 2006. We've seen it. It is defined as a vision or future collector road. A collector road does not connect to a highway. It is not an interchange. Those are arterials. Collectors roads' primary purpose is to funnel local traffic to arterials for high traffic volumes. What you're talking about here is this ultimate option, which by the way was not in the original presentation. alluded to but it was not shown.
It's been disguised as option A. It's not. is paving the way literally To put an interchange in and put a arterial just akin to State World 54 through Bexley. Okay, three, four years ago, I don't know exactly when it was, the southeast quadrant of the roundabout at Bay Village Drive and Tower Road. had commercial property was a plan, future land use there. That was changed by this board to residential. Right, now you just went and put residential property, people's backyards facing State Road fifty
four, a highway just like that. That was irresponsible to change at that point when this has been on the plans for two thousand six if you're saying so. And RTRL is not what we want to signed up for, it's not safe. We've never been able to study What was proposed here? It was a bait and switch tactic and we don't appreciate it. Thank you.
No clapping. Please
don't
do
that. You'll be removed. Doctor
Blanco.
And who's ever gonna speak after him, please line up so we can save time.
Yeah, yeah, which is I'm saying anyway. Oh okay.
Doctor Tavio Blanco, I'm gonna be talking about my property which is at [address removed]. And um let's start out since it's the tw twenty fifty anniversary coming up for the country, with one of the founding fathers, a statement he made, that'd be Benjamin Franklin. Way back then he was a forward thinker and he said, D Price of water will only be known when the well went dry. I'm here talking, like always, with you all about wetlands. That's what I do, preserve my wetland on my property. The
issue about wetlands is they're vital to recharge our aquifers. They're vital for stability of the earth. You don't have sinkholes. And just recently, this year for the first time I've ever seen, forestry put put most areas at high fire risk in the first week of February. That's unheard of. Usually it's April or May. Also for the s subsidence events. I just came back from Orlando, I was there for three or four days. There was a huge event over there that got national publicity. I don't know if you heard about it. There was a giant um apartment complex like we
have here, three, four hundred units, also had commercial. All of a sudden people got up in the morning to leave and they couldn't get out their doors because the building has shifted. We had to get Uh emergency come out and chop down doors, let people out, get the animals out. It's a disaster. It's all covered with tape and th they're all homeless now these people and the business are shutting down. So sooner or later, um, even though people want to talk about many things very important to them, Sooner or later things like wetlands become um vitally important.
So mine is called Wetland A3. It's very famous. Everybody swift mud knows it because I've been in court a lot protecting it uh for many different things. So most recently I I've been to all the meetings about rangeland and I I know about the uh situation with uh ponds. My concern is there are certain like minimum criteria, but through all my court cases and all my dealings with all the different agencies, uh because our our wetlands now latest aerial surveys show that over fifty percent of wetlands are totally gone at this point. They can't function
anymore and new elements just they'll just spring up. So what the Swift Men people I talked to and I talked to them a lot, they said with wetlands you should always go beyond the minimums to protect them. There's this pond here that originally was supposed to be right on my property, They bumped it over a little bit just on the edge of my property. There's a twenty-five acre piece of land that I set up on a I got all these documents if anybody wants to see them. Uh one of my court cases with uh Turnpike, um I ended up getting that land preserved and it's twenty-five acres, and what I've suggested is instead
of just doing the minimum and putting this little this pond over by my swamp, we went to the west side of that property. It still has the same connection to your road, the rangeland. but it gives extra protection to the wetland. There's not many wetlands left like this.
Th
this uh the PhD hierogeologist from Swiftman was in my place said, I I never see s uh wetlands that are this healthy. How do you do it? Well I'm always in court. I don't want to be in court. I want just to got protection. So it's a simple fix. Move the pond over the west end of that property. Everybody's happy.
Thank you, sir.
Hi, Joseph Elbert, uh [address removed], Lando Lakes, uh Backsley Resident. First I want to just uh Comment on a question that uh Commissioner Weight uh Weightman asked about. I think it's a very good one. When you talk about uh Gun Highway and the extension at the end of it and what's being done at that portion, you'll notice the response from Panos was that hey, you know, don't worry about it. People will basically be able to take the the path of less resistance, they'll avoid traffic. What it Contrary when it's
against his plan, you don't see that same argument when we're talking about the overpass in uh of 589. They're building a plan for that. They're going to say, hey, look, we're gonna this the solution is this, but they don't build that same solution there. They argue and say, hey, look, folks will drive around it. Why won't they say that here? Folks will drive around 589, they'll find a better path, right? That argument doesn't. Doesn't it? Correlate. Um I'm the chair of the Bexley CDD and I'm here to represent our community on
item 31. I want to be clear where our community stands. Bexley participated in this process in good faith. While many preferred a no-build option, we accepted Alternative A, the original alternative A. a four lane road, keeping the roundabouts, a Suncoast overpass, and no interchange. We are residents who are nearly unanimous on this. We are against the six-lane expansion of the or the Sun Coast Parkway Interchange now or in the future. That's a key point. Just because option it's good to have option value, it's
not good to have option value when it doesn't make sense for the neighborhood around it. Although labeled alternative A, what is in front of you is not alternative A, and I want to explain why this preferred alternative is something our community absolutely does not prefer. This alternative was never presented to the public. Alternatives A, B and C were shown at workshops where over 330 participated, including myself and many of the folks that are here today. The community made its position clear, then and after the public process closed, staff created a new hybrid that no resident has ever reviewed
or commented on. This is not how you build public trust. Now let's talk about what the hybrid actually does. The county is calling it a four-lane road, but their own study report calls it an interim phase with an ultimate phase of six lanes and a Suncoast Parkway interchange. The drawings show a forty four foot median designed specifically for inside widening to six lanes, and the bridge is designed to be widened to six lanes. This is not a four lane road. This is the first phase of a six-way highway through a neighborhood.
Then there are other financials. Alternative A costs $145 million, but the preferred alternative costs up to $192 million. That's $42 million more than the plan community approach, the plan that the community supports. At the time when the county and other critical transportation needs like Sun Coast Bull or Sun Lake Boulevard and Ridge Road, spending an extra $50 million to preserve an option. for an interchange that the residents do not support is not responsible use of taxpayer dollars. And let me put
the traffic in perspective as well. Alternative A, Rangeland Boulevard would carry out eighteen thousand vehicles per day. Under the six-lane scenario, this number jumps to 50,000, which is 70 to 80% of State Road 54. So I ask you to vote no on this and build the road that community supported, not the highway that we rejected. Thank you.
What?
Good morning board. My name is Buckshot Matz and I'm a resident on [address removed], as the previous gentleman was.
I'm I'm sorry, or the record could
My address is already in your records. You can look it up. I'm not here to do your job for you. I am the evil one here, and I'll take any anchor.
You'll only be able to find one. Yeah, they're all in each in the house owners ownership. I'm on [address removed]. I'm here to say that pretty much this rec project and the other ones You are missing the point of synchronization. You have this project and the one on the east side. Which you're at me at worst, you're hiding it willfully. At best, it's highly convenient. Now This project ends right prior to Brexit Elementary, which you say was elementary school safety. It ends right there and doesn't talk about that elementary school. It's right next to it. along with
everyone else that you build up a scenario where you built the goldfish's pond. If you put a goldfish in a tank that's ten gallons, it'll grow to that size. Put it in a twenty-gallon pond, it'll grow even bigger. Congratulations. You are building this preferred plan. With a very large pond for that goldfish to grow. People always go to the path of least resistance. All right. And they they'll easily ask, when once these interchanges are all put in, turn roundabouts are in, it'll be great for the first board until the next board moves in. And then they vote to get rid of them. And now you have a high speed rail or a high speed
road connecting fifty-four all the way up to forty one. Right next to people's backyards. Is that what anyone wants? Not when anyone would like to live in the right-of-way. I don't. I chose my spice looking very carefully at this as well. twenty fifty plan for the future? Also includes another road wrapping around the north side of our own community, if anyone hasn't looked at that one. And it's not included in this. It looks like it lines right up with that first roundabout. Which now you're gonna have four major roads, potentially, all in the same spot, next to people's houses. Not
a desire. Not as a plan. I'll leave the rest of the time for the rest of my community.
Uh good morning. Uh my name's Brian Faifel. I'm uh [address removed] in uh Bexley. Um Uh just for the record that I I am supportive of of alternative A. I uh think it was there. It was there when we came down. from Maryland to look at the at buying a house in Bexley. It's a beautiful place and it's a shame that we're here. Uh and it's very unfortunate that we're here. Um being asked to vote on a preferred alternative that has never even been communicated to the public. But
more concerning to me is that You know, I think we're trying to fix a problem that the county has created or has a part of the problem that the county has created. Um I look around and within three or four miles of the 54 Suncoast Interstate Interchange, we have uh at least 11 apartment complexes. 11 within three to four miles of that interchange that's the problem. And now we're being asked.
Six lanes right at the Um the communities that you you you represent. And That's it just blows my mind that that's the same number of lanes that 54 has. The same number of lanes. And it it's just disturbing. And then we're gonna spend millions and millions of dollars to prep against something. for six lanes interchanges that you don't even know what it's gonna look like down the road. Um so that's really the bulk
of what I wanted to say. Um so I'm asking you to not approve this alternative. Um option, go back to A. It was there from the beginning. It's a good plan and I think it supports everything that we need. Thank you.
Yeah wonder.
Good morning. My name is Paige Nardy. I live at [address removed] in the Bexley community. I'm here representing as a resident of Bexley. I will say I am on the HOA board. I was copied on all 225-250 emails, so I did see those that you all received them. I'm here representing my husband as well as my two teenage sons, and I'm asking you today that um agenda item number 31 be motioned for continuance. And if you choose to continue, then
I ask you to say no. Until the um Preferred alternative has been fully vetted and discussed with community members. Right now, as my other um residents have shared, this has not been done. Option A is what we were understanding would be voted on, not this D E I don't know what else I mean they're calling it this preferred alternative, but it's like this additional option that's been added on. Um earlier this month, David Ingold
was quoted in the Tampa Bay Business Journal saying, where are the growing pains? The biggest pain is that we are behind on roadway. Construction, the East West. Is this the solution that you're trying to find? This issue is here, so are you trying to put a band-aid on it and find a solution for it? I echo what my other residents have said with regards to um uh uh the impact of this. But what I wanted to focus on is the safety. This potential has an interchange
with six lanes going in front of people's homes. It's not behind their houses. If you go into Bexley, this is in their front yards. People who are trying to get to parks, schools, pre schools. The high school. There are like six to eight schools within a two to three mile radius of this area. Sun Lake, who we saw here today, which Miss Merlin, I was at the SAT committee meeting. She gratefully was excited that they were gonna be recognized today.
Um, but this is individuals trying to get to parks. They're friends' houses, go to school, and you're gonna put a potential for six lanes, fifty thousand cars. Now, what was added in is this underpassage. And Mr. Pano said, go look in Hillsborough on Lind Baugh Avenue, and there's an underpassage there. Couple of things. It's not at an interchange, it's just underneath a four-lane road, an established four-lane road that will never be. Be expanded to
six lanes. There's no room for it if you go down in that area. Number two, Bexley. It's a conservation. We have gators, snakes, wildlife. I love that as part of my community. But you want children and people to go underneath underpasses that are going to be built in a wetland area. It is not a solution that would be viable for Bexley. So I ask you to think about this: the safety for the children, not just today, but in 2050. House is not gonna move in
twenty fifty. It is still gonna be in Bexley and there's still gonna be homes that I would like to go to the community. So I ask you, especially Ms. Commissioner Yeager, this is your area. I ask you to put a motion out to either continue with this or vote no on this option. Thank you very much for your time.
Hi, good morning. Matthias Piercy, [address removed], Lando Lakes. Thank you, Commissioner, for the time today, and thank you all for the individual meetings that we had as well. I'm a resident of Bexley and as well as the HOA president. I'd like to talk today about fiscal responsibility. As we all have stated in the comprehensive plan back in 2006, option A was essentially what was agreed to at that time. Option A is what Bexley. supports option A is a $145 million project. What we're now contemplating today is a preferred
alternative that is $40 million more than option A. So it's $40 million on a gamble that hey I'd like to see an interchange down the road. Hey I think maybe we'll add it in 2040 when it's needed. In my house we don't spend forty million dollars today or my businesses I run, we don't spend forty million dollars today or thirty percent more of the budget on something I think may happen down the road. I can tell you the example was made of surround sound in a house. Surround sound in a house, I agree. Sometimes you build a house, you put in surround sound wiring
for it. You actually used to do that, but when you did it, it was a thousand dollars. It wasn't forty million dollars. And maybe you added it down the road. When I built my house eight years ago, we put in telephone jacks and cable outlets and all that. We paid extra money for that. Now it's all wasted. It was no good money. We don't know that money put into this project today for an interchange will mean anything in 10 years. Building methodologies, systems, ways of movement change every single year, and we don't know what comes at
that time. Again, $40 million is not an insignificant amount of money. The percentage spent on that for something that may happen down the road, and we may have FDOT approve it is way too much to gamble on as we move forward. Those funds could be used to improve 54. 41 and 54 is an absolute nightmare. We've talked about 54 the whole time. That's the big pinch point on 54 at this point. Is 41 and 54. We've also not talked about what about connecting Sun Lake from
Bexley Village Drive up to Ridge Road? That could eliminate some of this traffic. What about the project to extend Tower Road out to 41 and ultimately 52? I'm not sure where that's at at this point, but that could alleviate some of 54. There's numbers of alternatives that this $40 million could go to rather than a gamble of everyone's money. To say, hey, maybe this will happen down the road. I'd ask that you support option A and take the preferred alternative off the table. Thank you.
So
eleven fifteen,
I
get two more speakers.
Lisa Lopetine, [address removed]. I'm a resident Bexley. been there for seven years, uh when we came down initially looking at the community. Um, we were actually told that there would be a road eventually going and we were like, okay, that's great. You have to expand. You have to make more roadways, you have to do things so people can get around and do the things that they need to do. What we never thought would ever happen is a proposed interchange coming in. The
way Bexley is set up, I just don't feel an interchange is the appropriate thing to put in. I can s I get concerns about with the Amazon that's down the road. If you have, say, an Amazon driver get on there with his big eighteen wheeler. And he might decide to get off at that exit. as opposed to going on down to fifty four and going in the way it's supposed to go. So you're opening it up to not just pedestrian traffic, you're opening it up to uh any kind of traffic
that might want to flow off of that. I understand y'all have a hard job. I totally get that and I totally appreciate your time that y'all take to do your job, but I really please, please. Consider your vote very carefully and I ask that you vote for option A because that's the one that makes the most sense for our community. Thank you.
Okay. Christy King, [address removed], Land O' Lakes. I'm a resident of Bexley and I just wanted to speak on some of the concerns that we have with the new alternative proposal. Um it was not given as an option for all the previous meetings, so we do feel like we've been hoodwinked in a sense to the fact that it's still being labeled um option A when it's now an alternative. If you look at the infrastructure that they're trying to connect to, whether you look at Starkey at Gunn Highway and Rangeland Road where no light exists, no roundabout exists, you're
gonna have an influx of people who are taking this new extension to get to 54. If you look at the roundabout that currently exists in Bexley, it's a one-lane roundabout that you're proposing to Uh add two to potentially three lanes of incoming traffic into a roundabout. This roundabout, if you've ever been there, is heavily populated with pedestrians, people who are walking to elementary school in the morning, people are walking to their amenities within their community, and you're wanting to put an influx of traffic that doesn't even pertain to the community. There are several other areas in Pasco County that I think would
help relieve some of the congestion that you have. On 54 as mentioned previously, extending Tower Road, extending Sun Lake up to Ridge Road. And I feel like by putting this extension in that we knew was an option, all of us had looked and seen the maps. It was meant to be a small alleviation of traffic, not a major thoroughfare for you to add an extension onto the Sun Coast Parkway. I really wish that you would reconsider and choose to table this until more time and consider. consideration we could give it.
Good afternoon, guys. Um I'm an owner at [address removed].
Your name, please, sir.
Paul Ducharme.
Had you signed up previously?
No, I did not.
Okay.
I wasn't going to say anything, but then after the planner's presentation I was having a hard time not jumping out of my seat.
And your address please for the
right-of-way.
My house at [address removed] abuts the wetlands. And when I see these presentations and I'm hearing about the impact on the wetlands, I'm thinking What the hell is going on with that? Wetlands are sacred. That was brought up earlier by somebody else. But we're gonna be impacting wetlands to build these highways that nobody wants. Um and a little bit about me, I come from the Boston area where I retired from construction management and has spent more than a decade working on Boston's infamous Big Dig. So I understand how some of this stuff works. And
I did look at what uh listen to what you were saying about that intersection at Gunn Highway. It's just a simple little diagram. You cannot imagine how complicated that intersection is going to be. And then it comes around the back side of those subdivisions, crosses over the Suncoast Parkway, which is a two hundred foot wide expanse, crosses over and abuts, and comes into a uh Rotary at Bexley Subdivision. To me, that's like looking at a bulldozer, you know, in a playground. You know that that four lane highway is gonna go busting through that rotary
and just gonna keep on going. The one thing too about my experience with the Big Dig is that with a lot of these public projects is that they throw out numbers, projections of things 25 years down the road. They don't know. They don't know. And they don't have any control over the expenses. We heard earlier in this commission meeting that there were problems funding teachers' salaries, money needed to be spent on fire departments, but here we are looking at spending over Over two almost $200 million on a road that most people don't want. They
have done polls in the Basley subdivision. Over 80% of the people don't want them. So save the money. Don't do it. We don't need that stupid road. There are other alternatives. You need better planners and we need better Um oversight from this commission on this stuff. So again, I didn't think I was gonna speak, but again after that presentation I just couldn't I had a hard time staying in my seat hearing that. There's a million holes you can punch in that thing and I'm not gonna do it 'cause I don't have
the time. But um I would say table this for now. Like please.
All right, these are the last two speakers. And if you can please don't repeat what has been said.
Mr. Chairman Mariano Board, my name is David Silverstein, [address removed] in the preserve. I have one site specific for our community and one collective issue for all communities. After the original meeting, we found a series of drawings on the maps indicating sidewalk entrances into our community, which read, Only if the C D D wants it. We don't. I'm a supervisor on the C D D, and we communicated this information accordingly,
to mister Panos Conces, who indicated, yes, we will remove from the conceptual plans all sidewalk and walkway connections. That communication was in February of this year of last year. Subsequent to that, we had another meeting and the maps were put up again and all of them continued to show the sidewalk connections. It was brought up to their attention with forwarded emails and the response to that was, thank you for reminding me, I enjoyed talking with you, we will remove it.
As of three months ago, on your website, those sidewalk connections are still showing up if approved by the CDD. I would appreciate, please, if Mr. Konsus and his team could please address this appropriately and get rid of it because we do not want them. There are two sidewalks entering the community, one out of Sweet Springs and the other one out of Tucson Wind Place. Which we have been confirmed already will disappear, but as of three months ago it's still on your maps. last and
only of great importance to all communities. It takes twenty years apparently to make a decision about how something will eventually happen And I read that the impact on noise is high. Well we can all still hear five eighty nine and the big question when I brought it up was what will be done? And the answer was, once it's built, we will do a study to see how to address it. I really think somebody has to by now have a clue
on how to address noise coming off of a highway into a community. This is not reinventing the wheel. Please don't pass this until somebody addresses these issues. Thank you.
Uh these are the last two. We have nine people online, but those people online are gonna have to have to hurt after the break.
Uh good afternoon. My apologies for my appearance. I'm one of those working parents that sprinted over to try to make this meeting. I will try to keep it short and sweet. My name is Basilios Manasoyanakis. I live at [address removed] in the Bexley community in Land O' Lakes. I'm here today uh not just as resident, but as a parent of two young children. Uh my wife uh herself could not make it. She is a Pasco County native and we chose to move to Bexley specifically because it is known as a safe and walkable community.
Uh every day I see children riding bikes, families walking the trails, and parents pushing strollers. That is the environment we chose for our children. Safety is not just a general concern for me. It is very personal. We have personally lost a family member who was struck by a vehicle and passed away. So I understand very clearly how traffic and speed can change lives forever.
I understand the county is growing and the additional roads are needed. I'm not opposed to growth or infrastructure. But my concern is that this project could effectively create a highway connection and a cut through route for people trying to avoid state Route fifty-four, bringing regional traffic directly in front of a community where children live. Walk and play. I respectfully ask the Commission to prior prioritize the safety of existing communities. and ensure this road is a as a local connector and not a regional cut-through quarter. Thank you for your time and your service
to Basco County.
Okay. Last speaker for this break before the break.
Hi, um my name is Adam Saunders. I live at uh [address removed], uh Lando Lakes, Florida. Uh I'm a Bay City resident. I'm also on the C D D and the HOA, but I'm here speaking at in my individual capacity just as a resident. Um when I drove here today I passed through the Bexley Roundabout on Bexley Village Drive. I think I passed a pair of sand hill cranes, a group of people jogging, Um a person on a bike who I think was taking their their kid to school. Um Bexley
has an undeniable, uh charming residential character. I think that's the reason a lot of people moved to Bexley. A lot of people move into Bexley currently. Um for that for that reason, for that that uh that idyllic lifestyle. That brings me to Rangeland Boulevard. Over the past year, our community has been really actively participating in this process. The attendance at those workshops, a lot of that was Bexley residence. Throughout this process, Bexley has
consistently supported alternative A, including the four-lane roadway, preserving the roundabout on Bexley Village Drive. um the the Sun Coast Overpass and uh no new interchange connection. Um we attended the public meetings, submitted comments, evaluated alternatives A and B, and then later alternative C um when it was introduced. Um now this new proposed uh preferred alternative. Uh this proposal
includes a widened median to accommodate a potential six-lane expansion from South Branch to Bexley Village Drive and a future interchange connection to the Suncoast Parkway. Um this is all despite the expression of uh strong opposition um from the Batsley community and surrounding communities. um which would be most directly impacted. I know um Mr. Contas has said that this proposal does not include any interchange, but I think creating the infrastructure
for that interchange creates the uh temptation to build it in the future. Um many residents view this, rightly so, as an indirect attempt to enable the interchange um which was previously rejected at all levels of public comment when we've had that opportunity. Um This preferred alternative also does not include Any uh meaningful measures for noise mitigation, which I think is something a previous commenter had had brought up. or
traffic coming beyond the existing roundabout, um to preserve the the important residential character of Bexley. Um additionally, and this is a small point, but I think it's something meaningful. Um when I reviewed the route study. The assumptions of which I assume underlie the drive for this project. Something that stuck out to me was the projected increase in average annual daily traffic on Broadports Run from 3,500 to 5,000 by 2050 for a road that is
effectively an enclosed area with no new capacity for residential development or or areas of ingress.
Please
wrap
it up, sir. I'm sorry? Please wrap it up. Your time's up. Oh, okay