PC10 CPAL-2110 North Pasco RV Resort comp plan
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.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Planning Commission, Jan 6, 2022
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Planning Commission, Jan 6, 2022
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 1h 29m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 79% of 337 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
All right, so P ten
Hello, Valerie Brookins Planning and Development. We have before us one second.
Mr. Chair, do you want to mention that while the PowerPoint is being brought up for this item, that the um applicant has been granted 20 minutes on this item?
Okay, thank you.
This is PDD 220088, a large-scale comprehensive plan amendment for CPAL 2110 North Pasco RV Resort.
This shows the location of the property. It is in the North Market area and also northeast Pasco rural area.
Here is an aerial of the site. It borders I-75 east of Lake Iola Road and south of Blanton.
The proposals to amend the future land use maps 2-15, sheet seven, from AGR, agricultural rule to PD, Plan Development contains approximately 132 acres to allow for the development of an RV resort with a maximum of 550 RV spaces. Uh as I said, it's along I-75 east of Lake Iola Road and south of Blanton. Resolution would be to amend the future land use maps 215,
sheet seven, creating subarea policy, flu 7.1.63, North Pasco RV Resort, and amend the future land use map 2-9, creating sub-area 2963, North Pasco RV Resort. And there is also a rezoning, you will hear after this.
This is the existing future land use, which is agricultural rural.
And the proposed going to PD.
This is a conceptual plan.
And for comprehensive plan consistency, the following policies are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Policy flu 1.6.1 commercial development. Flu 2.1.5, protection of existing topography, flu 2.1.9, rural lighting standards, flu 2.1.11, rural residential roads, and flu 2.1.13, provision of potable water and sanitary sewer.
This comes with the recommendation that the local planning agency find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and recommend approval to Board of County Commissioners.
All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate that.
Good afternoon. Barbara Wilheit, [address removed]. And I have been sworn only once.
Ha ha.
As they're pulling up the PowerPoint, I do have a couple receive and files. I have the um resume of Frances Chandler Marino, as well as her two reports that she'll be going over with you and her PowerPoint after mine. If we could receive and file those, please.
Yes.
The reports are in your materials, so it's not something new. The staff has seen them in the in your materials.
Okay,
move the receiving file. Second.
Motion and second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay.
Thank you very much for having us here to present North Pasco RV Resort.
Our project team includes myself, Joe Simoneau of WRA, who is here today, Steve Henry, Linkston Associates, Greg Mayfield, who is our wastewater expert, is sick. I didn't ask, but he's sick. And Francis Chan Marino is here from Femme by Design. Some of you probably know Frances. She wrote the Comprehensive Plan in 2006. She was the author of the Northeast Pasco Rural Area Plan. And I'm very happy to have her here. Brian Nolan from Lacido and Associates and Don Ferezi, both teammates. Brian
is a landscape architect, not here today, but his you'll see his work. And Don Ferez did our renderings. And but he's not with us either today. We've been working on this project for quite a while. We initially submitted in February 2019 with 675 RV spaces. We got to a neighborhood meeting in September 10th, 2019, and we had a whole bunch of questions. We had only had enough knowledge at a zoning, at a land use and zoning level, and not a specific site plan
level. And so because of the we're in the Northeast Pasco rural area. and the concerns. We s we slowed down the project and we and we um did quite a few things and I'll show you the things we did in a few minutes after I have a list of all the things we did after our first neighborhood meeting. But ultimately, all that led to a resubmittal earlier in 2021. And because we refined our site plan, we knew that. We didn't need 620 675 RV spaces. The project would be at its maximum
at 550. So we made that um change in the resumidal. As you've heard, this project's located along the Interstate I-75, south of the Blanton Road Interchange. I-75 in that location, there was 48,500 cars that go by this property on a daily basis. That's twenty twenty volumes. Our project has a minimum requirement for a minimum of 10,000 square feet of resort lodge and clubhouse facilities. We have a maximum of
550 RV spaces. Those can be RVs, yurts, airstreams, or resort cottages. Resort cottages. The Yurts Airstreams and Resort Cottages will be on site. So if you want to come to our resort, but you don't have an RV to either drive in or tow in, you can come and stay at um stay at the resort in one of these accommodations that will already be there. We have no dwelling units. We have no permanent attachments to our RVs, yurts, airstreams, or resort cottages. That's important because
in the county we've experienced what's called RV Park Creep. Starts out as an R V park, ends up as a residential community. We've been very specific in our requirements for this project and our MPUD that we can't have RV Park creep. And um the project cannot be subdivided. Another thing to prevent RV park creep into residential permanent community.
This is a rendering of our resort lodge.
I going more again to how our project's gonna operate, no full-time residents, resort cottages cannot be homesteaded. These are direct quotes from the MPD conditions. And the we added two new things. We were I was working with the County Attorney's Office and staff yesterday to really drill down on the max maximum occupancy language and how that's gonna be enforced. Six months is a pretty important number when it comes to these types of projects. If you're under six months, Tourist tax kicks in, transient tax
kick kicks in from a tax perspective for the county. We want to make sure that that six month that nobody can um stay longer than six months is enforceable. So to make sure you get your taxes and it remains a transient project as opposed to turning into full-time residence, which seems to happen in some of our RV parks. So we've got maximum oxency in a calendar year shall be less than six months, as evidenced by a length of stay shown in the guest register. It's already Florida statutes. Imagine when you're collecting taxes,
there's lots of Florida statutes already to make these things enforceable. So I didn't have to create this, I just copied from the setup that the Flora statute already has. was important to the county and the county attorney's office that we maintain those guest registers for three years and make them in available for inspection not only to the county but the tax collector. Again, making sure that they can enforce and make sure that the projects paying their taxes and especially their tourist tax.
We compared this resort to some other projects, uh Quail Run, as far as how many spaces per acre, because you're gonna hear probably about density and numbers of of of R spaces that we have. North Pasco RV Resort has 4.66 RV spaces per acre. Quail Run, which is on long 75, it's the only other project along 75. It's just north of the Grove, south of Overpass Interchange. They have 9.41 RV spaces per acre. Three Lakes is in Hudson, 7.14.
Travelers Rest, which is right to the west of this project within Northeast Pasco rural area. Yeah. Six point three six R B spaces per acre. And then I entitled the Anclote River RV Resort in southwest Pasco County on Bailey's Bluff Road, and that's 5.24 RV spaces for acres. RV spaces per acre. So all that we did to reduce our density from 675 to 550 made it one of the lowest density, excuse me, not density, one of the lowest RV spaces per acre.
Here's all the things we did after our first neighborhood meeting. We really listened. We had a lot of people at our first neighborhood meeting. A lot of people. And we really listened to their concerns and and I feel we've addressed every one of them. Except for folks that are just gonna say we don't want this. We don't want this project, but as far as any actual concerns other than we don't want the project, I feel like we've addressed all of them. We hired an expert for wastewater treatment plant design. He is sick today, but if there's any questions regarding that, we have Joe Simono who's gonna pinch it. We prepared a topographical survey. the the property
in northeast Pasco tends to roll. And so it's important that we get on top of our topography. We were able to make a commitment that we're not going to do any mining. We were able to put in commitments regarding our grading and how we'll grade the site consistent with the Northeast Pasco rural area policies. We hired a landscape architect. We designed a specific regulatory quarter buffer along Lake Iola Road, which is a rural scenic road. And you have a handout that shows you that. The
concept site plan was also is also a handout of yours and was in the in the county materials. Our berm along Lake Oyola Road exceeds the Northeast Pasco Land Development Code requirements. We have a six-foot berm, 48 feet wide at base, 13 qualifying trees per 100 linear feet. You can see how it compares to the code requirements. four inch caliper and 12 feet high. Uh those trees have to be. We took an extra step, which I've never seen done before, which
is we did an internal master landscape and tree plan. A lot of concern on the board of County Commissioners about how internally projects are landscaping and what they're doing with their trees. We're a commercial project. The only thing that applies in the code right now is around the perimeter and how you landscape and buffer the perimeter and around buildings. So if we didn't bring this forward, we would could do anything we wanted within the project. But we wanted to demonstrate our commitment to this project and a quality project. And
so we came up with our own lands internal landscape plan. You have a copy of that, the plan, as well as The planting schedule. That is our proposed schedule and our proposed plan. We can tweak it here and there about if there's not a plant availability at the time of preliminary construction plan approval, but um but you have a a big copy of that as well as the handout that shows the plants. This is our con our conceptual site plan. A lot of really great things
on there. you have a large one of those and it was in your packet as well. This is the quarter cross section that I told you that I ex was telling you about. All these things I'm going over, these are regulatory, it's in the MPUD. We have to do this, or we have to come back to you all.
This is the master landscape plan. Hard to see here, that's why we made larger copies for you at the dais. And that's the plant schedule. More things that we did after the first neighborhood meeting was we prohibited the launching of motorized vessels on Moody Lake. Which is on the northern part part of our property. Limited residential use is adjacent to Moody Lake to passive only. Most developers would want to put their amenity next to the lake. Well,
what we did was we pulled that amenity back. And we s reserved um that only thing we can do up against Moody Lake is passive. And we can't launch anything motorized. We prepared an updated transportation analysis based upon the 550. We committed to northbound and southbound turn lanes on Lake Iola Road. And although they're not warranted by study. And we met with county staff about the Blanton Road and Lake Iola intersection, which I think staff is here if there's any questions about that intersections
off-site.
We propose additional comprehensive sub-area policies with a lot of the things I just I talked about, which was the recreational limiting the passive only to against Lake Moody. Requirement for cutoff luminaries, that's um requirement in the Northeast Pasco uh code. Landscape and tree preservation buffers. Um Lake Iola quarter buffer. We prohibited chain fences and opaque walls on Lake Iola Road as a scenic road. We preserved the existing native vegetation along 75. We put a hundred foot setback for RV spaces
from the existing Lake Iola Road. Well exceeds the the the um code. No mining, and we um put regulations on grading within slopes of 10% or greater, consist all that consistent with the Northeast Pasco plan. We also prepared, we hired Francis Chandla Marino to take a look at this, make sure we were doing the right thing and we were complying with the Northeast Pasco Rural Area Plan, Comp Plan policies. And the code to the extent that it was applicable. To extend it the code wasn't applicable, we made it applicable. by writing in
sub-area policies and comp and MPUD conditions. So with that. I would turn it over to Frances Giang Marino to go through her consistency analysis with you. And we'll be available for any questions. I do have the rest of my teammates. We'll hold them for rebuttal. Thank you.
Yeah.
Maybe can we have it? Put this thing.
It's just a right. If you wanna but you won't want it. Yeah,
highlights
okay.
Thank you and good afternoon. My name is Frances Chandler Marino, 1239, Fruit Cove Road North, St. John's, Florida. Um
been sworn, Francis?
I I have been sworn, yes sir.
Wonderful.
So Barbara had asked for me to review the application uh to determine whether or not it was consistent with the policies and the comprehensive plan and the land development code. Uh so I did that. I did that by um preparing a report. Uh it was in your package. It's also been submitted to the record. Uh today. Sorry,
could you could you speak up just a little bit more?
Oh.
Thank you.
How about I pull this right here?
That's perfect.
I don't want to blow everybody out of the room. Normally I'm very loud, so I'm trying not to be so so loud.
Um so the report's in there for you to read all the the details of it, but I'm just gonna summarize uh my opinions and findings relative to that. And as you look at comprehensive plan consistency in Pasco County, Pasco County's Comp Plan has a very clear way that it articulates how you determine consistency. And there's a standard of review that's provided in the policy of your planned that we cite that's in the future land use element. And it sets out
that very explicit standard of review. It includes two pieces that relate to the comp plan. One is a compatibility review. And then because this is in a special area of Northeast Pasco rural area, you also have to assess the policies for Northeast Pasco to determine its consistency. The standard review also requires assessments for natural resources and natural features, for general public facilities and services, and for transportation. So those are the
four components that you have to review to see whether or not a comp plan amendment or rezoning is consistent with the plan. So I'm going to go through the comp plan compatibility first. And the first thing that we look at is where the site is located and what is its surrounding uses. In this case, the adjacent uses are uh generally vacant with some large lot residential and agriculture and predominantly Interstate 75.
For my assessment, the adjacency to Interstate 75 was a very large factor in my determination because the intensity of that roadway at 48,000 cars per day is a very high intensity for that adjacency.
Um The findings there relative to that it is a commercial recreation use, a use that's generally compatible in rural areas. The intensity was compatible because of the adjacency to the interstate. That level of intensity might not be appropriate in other locations, but next to the interstate it is. uh that the planned development land use and the PUD zoning specifically. ensured compatibility
with the adjacent uses that were actually there of those lots because it allowed the application to address specific aspects of design. Your comprehensive plan policy and the future land use element also provides how you determine what design compatibility is. So the applicant went through that policy and identified and directed commitments for each of those design considerations. An interesting part about this project was that not
only did they embed those commitments in a PUD rezoning, which is typical, they adopted those commitments into a sub-area policy in the comprehensive plan. That was important to my finding because it made those a part of the comprehensive plan such that any um uh any variation to those would require a comp plan amendment. So you would do an assessment of consistency all over again if you varied those commitments. So it's sort of this two-pronged approach about how
those commitments were were managed.
the commitments included. Um undisturbed, undeveloped, and landscape buffers along the western and northwestern boundary and along Interstate 75. Uh as Barbara pointed out, there was increased size and opacity of screening. uh through the berms that were being located along I Lake Iola Road. Uh there were increased setbacks from Lake Iola Road. There is no residential density to be permitted on this site. And again, those compatibility commitments
and standards are adopted as a part of the comprehensive plan itself.
When I looked at consistency with the Northeast Pasco rural area, it's particularly and specifically related to the policies in the plan. That's what I've been asked to look at is its consistency with plan policies. The Northeast Pasco Rural Area Plan policies in the Comp Plan, there are four types of policies that you'll find in the plan for Northeast Pasco. There are policies that speak specifically and directly to the timing and location for increased
residential density. Uh it limits those explicitly. The policies provide design direction about how you create compatibility between new development and existing neighborhoods. It has express limitations for infrastructure. So you limit the number of lanes on certain roads, and you have limits for water and sewer. And it also has limitations on changing the grade on a property that would affect the rolling topography
that's uh so prevalent in this area.
I reviewed all of the policies uh that related to North East Pasco rural area and there are actually four. uh that are tangentially re applicable to this property, but out of being conservative, I applied them directly. Um and they relate to protection of assisting topography. the rural lighting standards, the rural residential roads, and the provision of potable water and sanitary sewer.
So the first policy that related to topography is policy 2.1.5. It's a policy that directs the land development code to be amended in order to institute specific regulations for that. The county did do that. They did amend the code to execute that policy. And the result was section 604.5b in the code that provides two separate
provisions for protecting topography in the rural area. The first is to limit the slope of grading so that it cannot be 10% or greater. and to restrict mining. The Northeast Pasco RV Resort application that was provided to me had commitments in the comp plant and the code that met both of those standards. It restricted the grading by that percent and it precluded any mining.
The second policy was policy 2.1.9, the rural lighting standards. That is a policy that directed the county to amend the land development code to include standards for executing that. The county did comply with that policy and amended the code to include section 604.5F. Um It is street lighting for subdivisions, so it is more directly replicable to residential
and not commercial, but this applicant applied it to even a commercial site and restricted the lighting. in coordination with that. So they included those standards in in their commitments in both the comp plan and the MPUD zoning.
The third policy that's applicable is policy
Two point one point eleven, I'll hurry. So I I won't read all this, but uh there are several provisions for the rural residential roads. Uh it sets specific standards for how those are applied to residential areas. Uh this is commercial, but they applied those exact same standards in terms of the trees, the berms, the landscaping. um setting back the RV spaces uh a greater distance uh than is required. and
also how they dealt with the fencing and walls. Sanitary sewer. It is not being constructed with central water or sewer. And then the other um provisions for natural resources. Um they have commitments that deal with all of those expressly. Those are in both the plan and the code in the MPUD. Um we went over the water in the sewer. And then they provided a transportation. um prop uh study.
Well thank you, but so as uh an expert in the field And having written the c code for this northeast area, as I understand. Um, you feel that this application is in compliance with the With the code?
Yes, sir. It's my finding that it is consistent with the comprehensive plan policies and with the land development code.
All right. Is there any questions from up here?
No. Thank you very much. Appreciate you coming.
Mr. Chair, we do have several folks that have signed up. Do you want me to read their names and then they can come up as I read their name? Okay, the first one we have signed up is Carl Wright.
Welcome Carl, if you give us your name and address and tell us if you're
Carl's right. Uh it's [address removed]. Um probably within a third of a mile of where this development is going to be.
Carl, you've been sworn.
Pardon me?
And sworn, right?
Yes, I did. Okay. Uh I appreciate this opportunity to uh address the commission and express my concerns. um in this beautiful historic building. More on that later. Um I like many of my neighbors who are here to comment in opposition to this. Um do not really like this development because we feel it's More chipping away. at the East Pasco overlay.
Um when I purchased my property, uh I Came out here specifically because it was a rural area. And uh when I looked at the East Pasco overlay at that time it was like uh an implied agreement or even an implied promise that the area would r remain rural And we have seen a lot, as a previous speaker said, chipping away at that. Uh I have some specific comments that I'm gonna make on the next item. Um
You know, and and I do appreciate all of the work the developer has done and all of the nice things that they say they're doing. But getting back to this beautiful building. Uh once you bring in a wrecking ball and demolish it. You never get it back. It's gone forever. And that's what we perceive as happening to the rural zone in Pasco County. And we do hope that you would take that into consideration.
I mean I know it's been recommended for approval. But We do hope you'd take that into consideration when you consider this. Thank you. Thank you very much.
And who's next? Next, please.
Let's let's keep her going.
Mr. Chair, if I could, um, I've been asked by the folks who are doing the audio vis video of this, if you could speak cl if all the committee members could please speak closer to their microphones. Um, but to move on to the next person, uh Ms. Nancy Hazelwood.
Nancy Hayswood, [address removed]. I have been sworn twice now. I have something I would like to put on the overhead, please. And left up.
This is Lake Iola Road when it comes up. Uh since we're picking and choosing policies, I'm gonna pick and choose some too. How does this plan preserve the rural lifestyle? That's part of the Northeast Rural Plan. How does this application preserve? Preserve the Northeast Rural Area Plan. It does not. I agree that they're putting a lot of extra buffering around the R V park and I think that's very nice of the applicants. The reason
that this project is not compatible with the intent of the rural area plan are the densities within the RV park. If the county wanted to put in an RV park in the rural area, wouldn't you think that they wouldn't go to RV parks using the rural regular comp plan and urban planning as its basis? Good examples of rural RV parks would be state parks and national parks. And that would keep our rural area. Let
me list the densities that the applicant wants to put in the park, all the amenities you can find in the city, by the way. First off, this is one hundred and thirty-one acres minus the fourteen underwater acres of Lake Moody, which will leave one hundred and seventeen acres. The RB park says they're having five hundred and fifty RVs. And then when you look at the Yurtz Airstream and Resort Cottages, it looks like they got fifty-four more to add to that. Almost 600. At
least actually it's a little bit more.
Uh also if you look at the way these R Vs are, it looks like there's only gonna be four feet in between R RVs. Talk about density. So also but wait, that's not all. Lodge, clubhouse, convenience store, two pools with a splash pool, places to eat and drink, two pickleball courts, two dog parks, playground, walking paths fifteen thousand foot gathering or entertainment area, all in a private gated
community. So how does this support the rural area plan? Does taking the habitat of all the rural life, wildlife, the turkeys, the bobcats, the fox, the hawks, Eagles, gophers, more that lives in this area, does that support a rural area or an urban area? We need our wildlife habitat to help keep a rural area. A gathering and entertainment area of fifteen thousand square feet, does that preserve the rural
lifestyle? Even if you delete the live rap and rock music that will probably be going on there every weekend, Lake Moody's proximity will Help that spread all over the community. Now the entryway to the RV park, my understanding is they're gonna have a fast and speedy entry and that the RVs can get in and out. But how many RVs are you gonna park in that entryway? If you look at it and you look at this. I'm
not sure you can get more em four in that entryway. They're gonna be on that road. And those are huge things. So What is rural about this? I don't think anything is rural about this except for maybe the buffering outside of it. You can't even put a tree in between those RVs. And Miss Marino, who I love dearly and really worked hard on the North East Row Area Plan, unfortunately,
it's not working. Thank you.
All right, let's hold it down.
Next person, Mr. Chair, and I'll probably butcher his name is Paul Butcher.
Uh
not bad. Did a pretty good job. Thank you.
I've been sworn. Uh Paul Betcher, [address removed]. Uh [address removed]. You know, I was going to talk about Moody Lake and its water quality, and it's all it's been stressed for years and years and years, and it's categorized as uh eutrophic, which means there's a lot of nutrients, phosphorus, and stuff. But after reading the consistency analysis, Uh page twenty-two. Number six, there will be no impact to this wetland
lake. That's what they say on category uh for the category one wetland, which is in part of the lake. Well, what happened to the other seven wetlands that are on that property? Does that mean that uh they're gonna be just bulldozed over in this process? Not a word on that. They have this stormwater right at the lake. So all this uh runoff from uh uh in this impervious
surface now be going down the lake. What are they gonna do? How are they gonna buffer All the stormwater. gasoline oils and stuff from entering Moody Lake, which is already impaired. I mean, is that some magical thing? They haven't done any due diligence. You know, you is there any estimates of polluting pollutant loading to the system? Has there any, you know, that they know but the water quality? I think Swift might stop taking water quality in 2018 on this lake. But you do have some tools
here. Uh one of them is the Uh comp in the comprehensive plan is the rural lifestyles. It says ensure the rural lifestyle is preserved by existing residents and remains available to future residents. Also in the land development code. uh eight hundred in a groundwater protection, protect and maintain the quality of groundwater in the county pro providing criteria for land use uh uses, you know, the water quality. It's in the heck heaven's sakes, it's in the Cypress Creek watershed,
you know. Um in the Pasco County's only ground groundwater protection uh um Uh um
They talk about the Pasco County Groundwater Protection Study done in 2001. Probably nobody in this room other than myself has read that because We don't have any, I don't think, any geologists on staff. I don't think we have any hydrologists on staff. We we have planters and you know they do a good job, but they don't know what's underneath the water or underneath the ground for any particular area. And here we're in a really fragile area. This is the highest recharge area. uh probably in the state and
already they put uh solar plant on the recharge area for the well fields of Dade City. I mean that was not a good idea. We've had two ULL reports, 2008 and 2013, and they both state that the natural beauty of the landscape makes Pasco one of the most distinctive places in the state. And what are we gonna do? We can just gonna keep on eating on it. And just eating on and taking away then the rural nature of it. My background comes from
I'm sorry, your time's up.
Oh. Well, I came for 34 years of working with the US Geological Survey, and I appreciate uh We need an environmental protection commission for Pasco County, just like Hillsborough County.
Sorry. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Following person, Mr. Chair, is Andrea Goody.
I've been sworn. My name is Andrea Goody. I live at [address removed]. I've lived in Dade City for 20 years. And up until this year, I was never so proud of the leadership in this community until this is my fifth meeting to try to preserve the beauty of my area that I live in. I've watched Dade St. Joe Rose. Road go down the tubes. I watched Happy Hill go down the tubes twice. I've been to the city commission meetings. This isn't what I
should be doing as I'm retired. And I don't have the ability that all these wonderful people have spoken before me, knowing a lot of the statistics. But one of the statistics that still haunts me is the one that the traffic study that was done for the larger developments over on Happy Hill and Dade City were done by the developer. That doesn't seem to be fair to me. And I'm sure someone will come say, oh no, that's not true. But I think it is. And now you're telling me on the even though it's this isn't the same one, I'm asking about traffic studies on Lake
Iola Road. I travel that road a lot. And I've seen more accidents on that road. There's very little of what you call that little piece on the side of the road. I'm not talking about the burns that they have in front of the the project. I'm talking about Lake Iola Road, which travels a lot of people. That's the way I go to Brooksville, Spring Hill. I go traveling. I go to Um Papa Joe's restaurant, if you will. But Lake Iola is a very, very important road to me. We have a home off of Lake Iola Road. We cease traffic. We have seen trucks roll over on several of
the corners on that road. So I don't think that they can travel, handle these 40-foot RVs pulling a 20-foot car. And Dade City says, Bicyclists, come here, travel our roads. Kill you on Lake Iola Road now when we put these big RBs in. I mean, it's, I'm sorry, it's very, very sad and disappointing to me. Um Let's see. What do I wanna say? Uh there is no breakdown areas for any of the cars alongside of Lake Iola Road. Um
I'm sorry to see this happen. I've seen St. Joe Road, which was my most beautiful site in the all of Dade City, go down the tubes. And I'm sure now Lake Iola will be next. Happy Hill has even less areas for you to pull over. If you guys would drive down Happy Hill I don't think you would be so happy to let all these new homes go in there until they widened that road. Anyway, thank you for listening. I hope I don't have to leave
Dade City.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
The next person, Mr. Chair, is Francis Goody.
I have been sworn. É quê? Uh my name is Francis Coody. I'm Born and raised in Saint Joe. I went swimming in Lake Ahola when there was not a house around it.
I have enjoyed your area. I I have seven sons that live. Mostly in the area. And I have to Support my wife. And that I w I was born and raised here. It's one of the most beautiful areas that I know of. And I came to the planning committee when it was formed.
I don't know how many of you guys were on it. But Uh I came to the meetings. And I also spoke on a a a little bit, but no, I'm not a I'm not a I'm not a good person at doing that. But anyway. Uh my my I have The biggest concern is what is what Enrique said. This area is supposed to be rural. The
planning committee was formed. And the the uh object of the planning committee was that everything north of fifty-two was to remain rural. Now you're eating it up by letting these developers come in. and uh ruin our area. The price of land has gotten to the point where you cannot afford to raise cattle.
And the and our Our crop our orange crop, our orange trees have gotten the disease and has wiped out That part of the of the agriculture in Pasco County. So what are we gonna do? Are we gonna become like North Tampa? I don't go down to 56 unless I have to. Because the traffic is terrible. And if you're gonna let this developments keep coming into Pasco County and in the Our
area My time is up. You got another minute, I think.
One more minute.
One minute. Uh I just asked you to look at a few things. One of the real concerns I have. If you are if you haven't been to the intersection of Lake Owl Road. And Blanton Rhodin You need to go there before you make up a mind of what you're gonna let all these trailer uh All these RVs come. There's going to be accidents on that corner. There's been accidents. Before And there's going to be many,
many more if you let these RVs come in there. That corner is An accident waiting to happen. Thank you.
I Jack.
Next person is Lisa Moretti.
I feel good about it. Uh my name is Lisa Moretti, [address removed]. Uh Lake Iowa, or sorry, [address removed]. I am the chairperson of the NERAC, which is the Northeast Rur Pasco Rural Advisory Committee. We were established under Resolution 21-137 by the Board of County Commissioners. I was elected to the position on August 12th, 2020. I come to you actually wearing two hats today. One is that I sit on that committee, but
part of the reason that I am on that committee is that I represent over 1,200 people out in our rural area. Um, I have to start by saying that Mr. Pitos and Abstentia and Tammy, I'm very disappointed the materials that you provided to the commission. Did not include See. Signatures. and signatures and signatures and signatures of people that said, this isn't the right development
in this location. It's not that we don't want development in North Pasco. It's that this is the wrong place for it. I gave you these in twenty nineteen. and they weren't included in any of the materials that you all were presented today. So disappointing. Uh the purpose of our New Rack committee, why we were brought together is to help make recommendations about how commercial should be developed in the rural area. And unfortunately,
we've been kicking that can down the road quite a bit, starting with Francis's work in 2006, 2008, 2016. Finally, we're getting to the point where we're sitting down and deciding what those recommendations should be, what is commercial in the Northeast Rural Area. So when Ms. Wilhite says that we've complied with everything, and Ms. Marino says we've met all the stipulations, but you haven't, because there is no stipulation for what commercial looks like in the rural overlay,
even though it says it would be established in 2006, 2008, 2016. So I would ask that you consider Postponing this decision. until our committee has had a chance to finish its work. 60 they started in 2019. 60 more days. To ask for a little bit more time so that the committee can come forward with recommendations that then you can comply with. Now that seems sensible to me. So
I ask that you go ahead and continue this item and wait until my committee is done with its work. Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, who's next?
Next person is Kelly Smith.
Good afternoon, Kelly Smith, [address removed] in the city of [address removed]. And I'm gonna echo what uh Ms. Moretti just said. I think that this item should be postponed because the Northeast Pasco Advisory Rural Advisory Committee has not had a chance to finish their work yet. And it's really important that they be given an opportunity to do that. What she did not uh relay is that. In the discussions that that committee has
had so far, they have looked at where the existing commercial locations are within the overlay. And they have, I believe with one exception, they have um had a recommendation not to increase the commercial areas at all. So the existing commercial. Zoned properties have been deemed to be adequate to serve the needs within the Northeast Pasco rural overlay. So the developer
is here today to ask to add 130 plus acres of commercial land. And the committee is saying we don't need any more commercial land in this area. So I think that's really, really important. Um I would also like to say that I'm getting really tired of um like so many other people having to stay on top of all of the development in the area and coming before committees and planning boards and commissions.
um and and being ignored. Um I'm also really tired of hearing from developers going above and beyond. The fact is, they're here to ask you for a special consideration. And when you're asking for special consideration, you should be willing to give and make your project better. So I I don't really Put a lot of faith in the fact that a developer is making all of these great offerings.
I'm asking you to put commercial where pro commercial was agreed to be. I'm asking you to honor the existing rural overlay and stop asking the citizens to keep compromising on that. Thank you.
Easy. Is next.
Mr. Chair, this is the last person I have signed up to speak, so you may want to call for more. Um, Margaret Woods. Okay.
And I've already been sworn in. Um Margaret Woods, [address removed]. Um, you know, in 2005, 2006, the county spent over a million dollars. developing the comprehensive plan that included the Northeast Rural Protected Area. It was negotiated at that time with large landowners. To transfer densities to other areas of the county. That's how the villages of Pasadena Hills came into being, is
that they agreed in these negotiations to allow the Northeast Pasco area to be protected and to instead transfer those density rights to a huge area where they have like 42 or 40. I think 42,000 dwelling units on about 22,000 acres. And these large property owners were people like the Schraeders, the Oakley's, the Evans. They were all involved in this. So for me to see the Northeast Pasco area constantly
being dinged for development is really disappointing, especially when the county spent a million dollars. To develop a plan to protect it. Now, as Ms. Moretti has just told you, the county has a Northeast Rural Advisory Council that has been tasked with the Chore of coming up with ordinances, the locations, and the design standards for all the commercial in the Northeast rural Pasco area. Therefore, there should not be any choices or any decisions made. About
a new commercial area until we've gotten those recommendations done, until they've been voted on by the County Commission. Because really, It's almost as if they're trying to get this commercial done before those ordinances are in place. Um This property was also owned and sold by Anna Oakley Maggard, who is Commissioner Ron Oakley's sister. He owns property directly across from this property. So most of us that
have heard about this feel that if you decide to go forward and approve this or recommend approval of it, that you at least ask that. that Commissioner Oakley recuse himself from discussing or voting on this because he has too much vested interest in it. The county has already shown a real disregard for the Northeast Pasco rural area. Can I show this picture of what the solar farm now looks like? This is first property is what
it looked like before the solar form.
Excuse me, we just have to uh receive and file. We have to get a motion to receive and file if we're gonna accept that. Second. Okay. Okay.
But as you can see, it's very rural then the Northeast Pasco rural area should have been protected from this, but unfortunately, Board of County Commissioners voted to consider solar and agricultural use. Which I'm I I doubt that land can ever be used for agricultural again, even if the solar panels eventually or God. It's not that I'm against solar energy, 'cause I'm not. But that was the wrong place for it. It was the wrong location for it. And none of that energy is to benefit
Pasco County. It's all going north from here. It was never to benefit us. Why do we give up our rural area for power that's not even to our benefit? So I really hope that you will consider at least recommending that this all be postponed until after the Northeast Rural. Advisory Council has made all their recommendations for commercial since this is absolutely commercial use in the Northeast Rural Pasco area. Thank you.
All right. Uh so if we don't have anybody else that's signed up, is there anybody else that would like to speak?
Please feel free to come forward if you'd like to speak.
Okay, we need your name and address. Have you been sworn?
Uh no.
Of course, I
swear.
Hi, my name is Joan Kerwin. I live at [address removed] on beautiful Lake Hancock. Just down the street from where this horrible destruction of rural landscape is gonna happen. It makes me sick when I have to leave um my compound to go out to Uh Lake Iola to Blanton, as Mr. Goody stated, it's a death trap. We can't even get our garbage picked up. in this development where I live. That
we're lucky to get one day a week pickup service and you want to add What more? For less? We don't have any any of the infrastructure to take care of what you want. Uh the garbage pickup, the water. Um all the services and based on the 2020 census. Well, that wasn't included in the 2020 census. The infrastructure is not there to take care of this. And it's really important to me and my family. Uh
not to destroy more. of our beautiful property. Thank you so much for listening. And I just noticed that those women were talking to among themselves during the other ladies speaking. It's very unprofessional.
Thank you.
Okay, so is no one else? All right, would the applicant like to come up and respond?
Mr. Chair, can I ask a question before we get up and Barbara might be able to to answer this too. So Miss Buretti, can you confirm the the timing you said for the the completion of your work?
I'm sorry, she's gonna have to come back up. Mm.
Yeah.
Could you just give your name again so it'll know on the on the record?
Um, so as chair of the NERAC group Uh we have a meeting scheduled coming up uh this coming Wednesday. And it should be part of wrapping up what we have been progressively moving through. And then a following meeting, the following third Wednesday of the following month, we should be able to complete our recommendations.
Okay.
That's our goal.
And a follow-up question to that is uh has there been any coordination between Ms. Wellhite uh or her team and and your group through the side.
Ms. Will Hight has been at every meeting.
Okay.
So she's very well aware. Yeah.
Thank
you.
Excuse me, but how how long has your organization been? In existence.
The Nurec Group? We were impaneled on August twelfth, twenty twenty.
Only twenty, okay. That's
Oh I'm sorry. Twenty one. Sorry. COVID got me. Sorry. Twenty one. Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you.
So can I ask a question related to that issue as well. So I guess it's really for staff or maybe the applicant knows too. So this is clearly a non-residential use, but I guess my question is Is it really a commercial use? I mean, it to me it seems like it's more of a Recreational lodging use more so than a commercial use. But I guess I'm not I guess my question is for Denise. What do we
consider? Because the Com plan talks about developing design standards for Office and commercial uses. Now it does say you could we could include other non residential uses, but um And this came up when the solar farm litigation that Solar farms aren't really an office or commercial use. They're more of an inst but I guess my question for you is. What do we consider this use? It's clearly non-residential. But are we sure we consider it commercial as opposed to lodging or recreational?
Yeah, th this use is not considered a commercial use. It's considered a recreational lock lodging use. But
it's non-residential. You also have a store on site. You have to do it. My question
is to staff. I'm not asking you questions.
The reason I bring that up is because I'm looking at the Complan policy and even if that committee is charged with implementing this policy It's talking about design standards for office and commercial uses. I'm not even sure. The charge of this committee to Or any or staff. is necessarily to develop design standards for recreational lodging uses. So I I'm not really sure. And I guess I could ask staff if are are they in fact developing design standards for recreational
lodging uses because if they're not I'm not sure what the point is of waiting until this committee finishes their work because You'd be waiting on something that's never going to happen. So Is there anybody from planning who's working on this committee that could tell me whether in fact You're working on design standards for recreational lodging uses.
David, I could address that. Uh Jeffrey Jenkins with Planning Development. Um I have been involved with the Northeast Rural Advisory Committee. Uh and I can tell you that to date they have uh They have recommended only two nodes to be considered. uh for uh non residential uh enclaves which this particular site was not considered by the committee.
Uh at all. So Yeah,
but that isn't my question because the current comp plan doesn't require us to develop nodes. But the current comm plan requires us to develop as design standards for non-residential development, which is defined as office and commercial uses. It could include others, non-residential uses, but my question is, what is staff in fact working, what design standards is is staff in fact working on?
Well we we haven't got that far with the committee. Uh we would hope to, like uh Lisa had said, this this month at our at our meeting in January. Uh and then if we need one, we would have an additional. How long did
it take staff to develop the design standards for residential uses in Northeast Pasco?
Uh I did not work on that. Uh so I'm not sure.
Buddy know the answer to that? How long it took us to do design standards for residential in northeast Pasco? My recollection is it was like a year or two long process.
It it seems that long. And I think there were several continuances in between.
I don't want the Planning Commission to be misled by the fact, oh, there's just a couple more committee meetings that need to occur. Hmm. What Mr. Jenkins is saying is they haven't even started work on design standards. And so we don't and we don't even know if those design standards would include Lodging recreational uses at all. So w apparently all they've talked about is nodes. So And even once they got to that point. I it's probably a year or two process before you can even get to developing those design standard.
So I I don't I think it's a little misleading to say that this is all gonna occur in a couple of months. I I d I don't think that's reality. I agree with that. Nor am I sure that the Complon even requires us to develop design standards for lodging and recreational uses, the way I read it, I don't think it does.
Anyway, that's my point. M my only comment on that is that um if we look at lodging and and recreational uses In my opinion, those are commercial uses because they depend on income that's derived from that use. Yeah. They're not it's not it's not it's an overnight stay. It's not a permanent residence. So I would have to classify it under my Experience is eight type
of commercial use.
In and it may be. My point is is that definition of what using commercial use under the Com plan that will have design standards apparently hasn't even been worked on. Right. So I don't think that these regulations are g right around the corner, is my point.
I I agree. I totally agree with that. It's a it's a lot more complicated than two weeks work.
I would just add to that discussion a couple of things. One is It's not Ms. Moretti's committee. It's the Board of County Commissioners Committee. They set up the committee. This will go to the Board of County Commissioners. They can make whatever they ultimately want to do. I'd ask for you all to make a recommendation based upon the comp plan today. The rules that we are supposed to abide by and we've complied with. All the discussions have been about C one and C2 uses. We're not a C1 or C2 use. We're, as you have said, recreational
lodging use. We have a specific PD. um comp plan policy, MPUD zoning. So we we are not the things they've been talking about. These projects never come up one way or another in all those meetings or any of the materials. Um so uh I agree with all the statements that are being made. regarding what the focus of that committee is, of the board's committee. relative to our project. And our project's been pending for quite some time, but ultimately the board can decide. But we'd ask for you as a committee to move
forward after we give rebuttal to move forward and make a recommendation to the board. The um I do have A couple of things came up which I want to ask my teammates to just go over, which is uh transportation and traffic from Steve Henry and then Joe Simono talking about um water, wastewater, stormwater. And then I have a few just uh things I would like to go over and we'll uh let you all make your decision from there. Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
Good afternoon. Steve Henry, Linkson Associates, 5023 West Laurel, Tampa 33607, and I have been sworn. We did do a timing and phasing analysis for this project. One of the comments was Lake Iola and the level of service of Lake Iola. In fact, with this project in place, the VC ratio, volume to capacity ratio is 0.21. meaning that we're only using 20% of the capacity of the road once this project is constructed. So there's plenty of capacity on Lake Iola Road
to accommodate the existing traffic, future traffic, and the addition of this project traffic. In addition, the intersection of Lanton and Lakeola was evaluated. We looked at that. The level of service of that roadway is acceptable, level of service. It meets all the design standards. We did meet with the county looking at several different options. And I think Vancat is here can discuss the one that I think the county has elected to move forward with. But we have looked at that intersection as far as a level of service
standpoint, there's no issue from that standpoint. That concludes my presentation, unless you've got any questions.
I have one. Sure. There was a comment regarding traffic going into the park. I think it's item B on your map that I have in front of me. They indicated there there might be a backup onto the main road there be as as vehicles enter the recreational area.
So two
things on that.
Yeah, go ahead. So one is that um based on our analysis, both north, you know, left and right turn lanes are not warranted for the project driveways. But we are putting in full uh southbound left turn lane and northbound right turn lane into the site based on current design standards. Thank you as far as the the queuing of the uh the vehicles. The reality is the majority of traffic that you see during the AM and PM peak hour
from these facilities are not RVs. So you don't get You know, most of the w what happens is someone comes in, they stay for a week. They they tow a car. they drive in and out with their car. They're not going to the grocery store to in their R V. They're not going sightseeing in their R V. Uh but from our standpoint and and again I I'll you know, let the experts as far as that, but th the the they have designed it based on the history of R V parks, knowing how much room they
need to be able to accommodate those R Vs coming in. But you're not seeing the the traffic volumes in our our analysis are not all RVs coming at one point in time. They come throughout the day, they're sporadic throughout the day, because the reality is if you're driving an RV, it means your recreation, you're likely not coming during the peak hours. You know, why would you drive a an R V and come to an R V or leave during the peak hour? So that's the reality is and so they're really more sporadic throughout the day.
Ask a question. Yeah, yeah, go ahead.
Yeah, answered it. So Mr. Henry, there was a comment raised about the shoulder on like Iola Road. Um Was a substandard road analysis done for that road and what was the
correct the substandard road does not require paved shoulders. Uh it requires the width of the road and requires a shoulder, stabilized shoulder, but does not require paved shoulders. So I think what the comment was was there are no paved shoulders. Your substandard road criteria does not require paved shoulders on those these type of roadways.
So did you and staff determine it meets county standards for
the road?
We submitted a substandard road uh application. It was reviewed by staff and determined that it does meet standards. It is the the the lane widths are tw are eleven feet, which meets the county standards for that type of roadway. It does have a again a a s shoulder. It does not have a paved shoulder. Uh, but again, per the design standards and per the substandard road criteria in the county, you're not required to have a paved shoulder to meet the standards.
Yeah. Any other questions?
Yeah, one more regarding the water.
Pidäa niin.
Alettua.
That's the next director.
Yeah. The attorney, your attorney, uh representing the organization or the company for the park, made a comment and stressed the fact that they have got above and beyond a water treatment system. When you use this water. Will it go into a county system? Or is it gonna be held on the property? Or where will they Water go after it's been used?
It'll it'll be it'll be held on an on-site wastewater treatment plant where it will be treated and then distributed through about eight acres of allowable green space.
Not into the lake, on the property. It will be very similar to the same system that's at Traveler's Rest. Only this will be a lot more up to date than what's a travelers rest. There's a hundred percent redundancy throughout the system, double pumps, double storage. Um it's all in accordance with state and federal Regulations. And so sorry. Joe Simono of WRA Engineering, 4260 West Limebaug Avenue, Tampa, 33624, and I have been sworn.
Mr. Bletcher, I believe his uh was his last name. He did comment about the the the lake itself that the lake uh
Like Moody.
Yes sir. Thank you.
My concern would be He brought up some very good points. You got the you got the the uh Runoff from rain, and it rains quite a bit. We both know that. Isn't that runoff could go into Lake
Moody? Yes, absolutely. And and I I can I can address that very valid concern. Yes, sir. Um currently uh the land it's not rangeland, it's not forest land. It's um covered by agricultural land alterations, including citrus groves and other land alteration that's completely allowable under the agricultural capacity that it's under right now. What will be designed will be designed with a stormwater management system in accordance with Southwest Florida Water Management District and Pasco County standards.
that adhere to EPA federal and state requirements for water quality treatment. And what that means is any rain that falls on our developed portion of the site will go to these stormwater management systems initially, which are basically holding cells. Water quality treatment in accordance with all federal and state standards will occur in terms of settlement, grit removal, which was brought up, baffles, and skinners that will keep grease from entering the lake, and then biological treatment for any nutrients that enter. So
nothing is going to run directly into Lake Moody as it currently is now off of the agricultural operations. Yes, it will now go. into these
what about testing that runoff water from your property? Will you be doing any testing at all?
No, there's no requirement for that because it's a presumptive criteria, meaning it goes into these holding cells and physically cannot get out until it's been retained for a certain amount of time. So it's not like a pump that can fail. Or or or something along those lines. It physically is gravity into there and there's control structures that only let a certain amount out at a certain rate so that the state mandated water quality treatment can occur.
I I guess I Did not word that question correctly. The discharge from your property after you go through this whole system that you just spoke about, will there be any it will be going into the lake movie? Yes sir. And will it be tested from before it discharged into the lake at all from your property.
No, there's no requirement for testing from the water management district or Pasco County as long as you're meeting the criteria for design of those holding cells. That's odd. The industry term is presumptive criteria. It's just a term that means it's presumed if you meet all these criteria. i it will it will work out the discharge end. Yes, sir. Thank you.
Any other questions?
No, I think there was um some reference made to being impaired waters and Um, I think there was reference made to Cypress Creek. Are there in addition to what what you think of as normal traditional stormwater quality, is there additional criteria that needs to be adhered to if that is an impaired water?
If it is an impaired water, absolutely. And thank you for bringing that up, Mr. Girardi. If if it is an impaired water, if there's many, many industry terms. Um what Mr. Girardi is referring to is if it's an outstanding Florida water, it's one and a half times that treatment presumptive treatment requirement we were talking about. If the Department of Environmental Protection has deemed it impaired for nutrients, which it's not flagged on the map right now, but as us engineers know that at any time it could show up on the map based on all the current
testing that's going on for with existing conditions, then we automatically need to adhere to stricter standards. So there's no free pass whatsoever. At whatever time we uh submit that application, we have to meet the requirements that are in place at the time. And if DEP deems it as an impaired watershed, we'll absolutely need to meet that criteria. And it's the same exact thing we're doing, just a little bit more. It's not like we'll throw this out and let's come up with a different idea. It's just the same, but a little bit more.
Okay, any other questions? Any other concerns? Yeah, David,
go ahead. Go ahead. So um I know that Margaret Smith and Venkat are here. But I I think they should be given an opportunity to address the Lake Iola, Blanton Road, intersection Because I think the county has some plans to on how to address that intersection. So I'd like Venkat to at least address those. Thank you there.
This is a Venkat Badi Kudek, uh Pasco County Traffic Operations Manager, I've been sworn in.
comments made about the current traffic conditions and the future, which we don't know. when this is going to be continued or approved or not. But I just want to go over the existing conditions and what the county has planned regardless of this project for this intersection of the Like I are on a Blankton Road intersection. So I want to go over about 10 or 15 slides so the people, the public, and the planners and engineers get an idea of the existing and what we're proposing. Next
slide, please.
So this is the current uh scenario at this intersection of a Lake Blanton, sorry, Lake Island Blanton Road. The next slide, please. So the currently you have a three stop signs And I agree, not enough stacking for any of the moments at the intersection. And we are aware of the issues. Go to the next slide, please.
So this is what in reality what you all see right now. So you have a lot of object the reflective markers on edges and now you can see all the stop signs and everything. Next slide, please.
Both the consult uh the developer's consultant and the public is talking about the too much traffic. I wanna show what we We recently collected the traffic accounts at the central section, so I want to give you a picture of what it is. On a twenty four hours, you got about four thousand cars. Going the other direction.
And if you look at the Lake Ayola portion. You got about two thousand cars coming that from that side. Majority of the traffic is basically coming off of Planton coming and going to the north. That is the main portion which is carrying a lot of traffic. And this is the daily volume means on a twenty four hours. If you go to the next slide
This is uh during the peak hour of the AM, means morning when the people are going to the work. You see, about in an hour How many cars you got about five hundred or six hundred hour cars going? And from on Lake Ayola you got about one hundred and thirty cars coming. Which means on average you're talking about Two cars. Per minute.
Go to the next slide, please. And the P M P cover basically the The flow reverses. Got more people. Going the opposite way, going to the homes and so forth. Regardless of where you're talking about between two to three cars per minute during the peak hour.
The next slide, please.
So I know we talk about the number of crashes. Yes, we agreed some some crashes happening at the central section. We pulled how many crashes? We pulled for the last five years, how many happened? The display says about eight crashes. There's some in the next slide also, but you got about five here. About four here, total nine crashes that happened. If you can go back to the previous slide, please. So out of this, you see that uh off-road
no injury, which is the shown in blue. There's a one road, one accident that happened in the intersection which is injury resulted. or of the four off roar, no injury means, If you look at the contributing causes, it shows what exactly why they're happening. These doors are eleven feet wide, I agree. Posted about forty-five, fifty-five miles. And a majority of us agree what the process speed means, what we Dry wet.
Again the mix of the Traffic here is different. Of these five, four of them went off the road. Actually, these are five crashes off the road went off. When do you go off the road on a curve? If you don't follow the advisory Are the posts of spades? So the crash reports of all these five crashes show that All these people are speeding. So the main contributing causes for this intersection is basically Or
listen to high speeds. I agree that happens that are happening on the night time is because of the visibility issues. And the intersection configuration because you got too much con confusion at the intersection. Of course, the distracted driving. The solutions while we're proposing, regardless of this product. Based on the concerns which we receive from the public.
We want to be proactive on the county side. So we're working on project To fix this intersection. So the The four contributing causes we listed and the potential solutions. Speed adjustment. If the road is not designed for 55 miles, if you're posting at 55 or 45, automatically you see the runoff of road crashes happening. We're trying to address that. Second one is we're adding the street lights. For this intersection. On
a proactive measure, not only this intersection throughout the county, we're doing that one to improve the safety for the public that are travel using these county roadways. And the third one is Intersection modifications. The next couple of slides we're going to go over. And the fourth one, distracted driving, your gas. We can't fix the stupid right? Same thing. What are the next one, please? So out of the nine crashes,
the first five are basically because of the stability of the drivers. And then coming to the next four. Out of the four. Again. Almost only one accident. Happen.
Because of the medical conditions. that happened to the driver. But the other three again They're The accident reports, if you go through the accident reports, it clearly shows the drivers are not following the speed limits. And not following the advice. The signage located at the intersection. I agree with the limited stacking distances. Regardless of this project, there is a problem. If there is a big truck is coming and making a left turn or making
or waiting to make a left turn, yes, it may encroaching into the other travel lane. We can understand that one. Again, these are the three which can be controlled again with the proposal modifications we're coming across. If you go to the next slide, please.
So I just want to reflect to all again. These are the existing conditions.
With the information which we receive After we realize that this project is coming Regardless of that is going to happen today or not. wanna be proactive so we're coming with a couple of modifications. It's in the current Year itself. If you go to the next slide, we're gonna show.
Sorry, if you go back to the existing please, sorry. It's a little bit confusing with the short Stacking distances and so forth. There is no stopping for the Blandon road coming from where from east.
North. That is one of the problem. The people are going at a higher speed. that are going off the road and getting into the crashes. The only way we can address this kind of situations with this confusion intersections are If you go to the next one, please.
But trying to bring it Eliminate the confusion, making it as a real three way stop sign.
Which makes easier even for the existing volume trucks to make a safer turn. We're trying everybody to bring to the point where everybody has first one come faster.
And not only that, we just proposed next slide please.
You see that traffic volume. that is going from Plankton to the west to the north. And also coming from north, going east. That is the situation. Maneuvering this curve, that's where we have getting a lot of the road crashes. With this approach. They will be coming to the stop means you're not going to have that problem anymore.
Go to the next slide, please.
And we're adding a couple of intersection lights, which we're going to adhere. But the rural Lighting standards. It only Let Lights up the intersection to help the traffic to make their turns to see the roadways. Go to the next slide, please. And the stop signs, we're going to make them lit in the nighttime with the blinkings so they can see in the nighttime. The stop signs can
be visible. With a supplementary next slide, please.
With the stop ahead sign with the flasher. So these are all going to help you. better to make the existing intersection operate better safely for everyone that are using currently, regardless of this project comes in or not. I'll be more than happy to answer any questions.
Okay. Yes there. Pencat, what is the timing of doing these improvements?
Uh we will be starting probably in the next three months. But it's going to be one piece at a time. Like I said, we will be finishing in the current fiscal year, which is before the October of this year.
And when do you think they'll be completed?
Uh like I said, some of the things we can do faster, but some of the things we had to wait for the Vetalakuchi to bring back the poles and install the lights. Those things I cannot give the timeline. But definitely we should be able to done before the October of this year.
Thank you.
All right, thank you. Any other questions from up here?
Thank you all.
Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
Um before Barbara speaks, can I just get Denise to confirm there's nobody on WebEx for this item? Is that accurate?
Sorry, yes, that is accurate. There's no one that has signed up on WebEx for this item. There is a member of the team on WebEx, but there's no one that's signed up to speak on this item. So your landscape architect is on WebEx. Just to let you know.
Um Thank you, and I appreciate Van Kat's presentation. I can put on the record that we'll have no trips, our project will have no trips on the road this year. So uh it'll take us a while to get through uh to get through the permitting process as well as to actually construct this project. So his his um uh modifications will be done well before we have any trips on this intersection. The other thing I was remiss when we were talking about the design standards,
I recognized that there weren't any commercial design standards and certainly no design standards for recreational lodging or re-resort like this. So I wrote them. Knowing how long it takes the county to write things, I wrote them. with my team and put them into the comp plan and put them into the project. So all the things when you look at the Northeast Pasco LDC that the LDC that applies to Northeast Pasco rural area that applies to residential. I
took them and had my team help me apply them to this project. So we're not running without doing anything. We're not running and trying to do something quickly before something else happens. it's been very thought out and and very uh specific in how we address this and um We certainly aren't just trying to rush something. By no means.
There was a a c a question that we're we can exceed 550. That's just not correct. We are limited to 550.
There's been a lot of concern regarding chipping away of the rural area and that's just not the case. The the when you hear about the things that have occurred on St. Joe Road.
Uh listen, hold on,
Martin.
I'm not going to have anybody be discourteous to a speaker up here. Nobody was discourteous to the people that spoke before. It's not going to happen now.
The St. Joe Road projects are where outside the rural area. They're in land use designations of Res 3 and Res 6. Ms. Peggy Wood's property is Res 6. She lives across from one of those projects. There's a reason why the Rural Area Line didn't include those projects because the Rural Area Line is at Res One and it follows the Res One line and the Comp plan. That's why that Rural Area Line was adopted, but they don't tell you that. They say they're chipping away at the plan. Well Those projects are outside of the plan, outside of the boundary. They're in an annexation
area that the city and the county had agreed to. It's served by water and sewer, central water and sewer, that's not rural. So I I just take I take issue with those um those facts, those what are appeared to be facts that aren't facts. There's a lot of good in Northeast Pasco on that of this rural area plan and we're fitting into the plan. You've heard the person that wrote the plan tell you that they're following all we're following all and exceeding all of the requirements for development of this project in Northeast
Pasco.
And we'd ask with that, we'd ask you to make a recommendation of approval, follow staff's recommendation of approval, make a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. Thank you.
Thank you. Any more questions for
uh Barbara, Ms. Wallheit? Just for clarification, your next vote is on the plan amendment. Right. I don't want to be clear there's still an upcoming vote on the M P U D. These have to be two separate votes, I want to be clear. Okay. And two separate public hearing.
All right. So uh having heard all the issues, uh do I hear a motion one or the other?
I have a question before we get to that part.
Yeah, go ahead.
Um David on condition number thirty-two. How about question? It talks about the
that's that's the MPUD.
Okay, we'll wait on that. Okay.
The MPUD. It's it's handled the plan amendment first. Okay.
Okay. Just a Point of clarification here. So Recreational vehicle resort is actually uh defined in the comp plan. But we don't have anything that provides any type of guidance.
So I think staff and the applicant address this question better. But I think Those are d I think R V is a defined term in the land development code. Recreational vehicle is a defined term. But I think the discussion was that there are no design standards for RB resorts in the Northeast Pasco rural area currently. And there may or may not be in the future. We don't know. But I think what Barbara said is in the absence of those design standards, they put them into the MPUD. Does
that answer your question?
And if I could just elaborate the RV parks, if you look in the glossary of the comprehensive plan of commercial use, it calls out recreational vehicle parks. So that's where we got that it's defined as a commercial use.
But the issue of which commercial Commercial uses will have design standards in Northeast Pasco is still to be decided. That's what the Comp plan says.
Alright.
Alright.
Okay, we have a motion to approve. And we have a second. Any further discussion of the motion? All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign.
No.