Pasco Plays recreation and open space element

2:14:33Uh next on the agenda is the Pasco Plays chapter, which was worked on um with uh a number of stakeholders, including um community stakeholders, the Parks Recreation Natural Resources Department, other departments in the County, County Attorney's Office, uh Planning, Development, Economic Growth, like like in the previous chapter, uh helped to facilitate the draft

2:14:59Um you should have gotten as part of your materials the draft chapter, the red line, the policy change tables that trace the edits from the current comprehensive plan to the proposal in the in Pasco Plays. And of course the the data and analysis. Hyatt and I are still here through this presentation. Hyatt will walk us through it. Again, just like before, we're not going to go line by line, but we are open

2:15:29to uh individual policy discussions just like we we had. Additionally, we also have members of the Parks Recreation Natural Resources Department to help the conversation as well. With that, I'll hand it over to Hayan.

2:15:44Thank you. Hi, it's Ms. Dilly, Planning Development, Economic Growth. So now we are on Pasco Place chapter. So Pasco Place chapter is the recreation and open space element. Just like Pasco lives, Pasco Plays is also a mandatory element under the chapter or under Chapter 163 Florida statutes. The purpose of this chapter is to plan, develop, and manage a countywide system of parks, recreational facilities, and open

2:16:14space to meet the needs of our growing population, ensure that the county continues to provide quality amenities and facilities that enhance, of course, the quality of life of our residents. The chapter also ensures that we preserve. the county's natural beauty.

2:16:34Key updates to this chapter include the reorganization and formatting of the GOPs. We want to ensure that we're improving readability and clarity. We removed policies that were duplicative and simplified the language throughout the document to ensure that it's more accessible. This chapter contains one goal, ten objectives, two of which are new, 53 policies including 25 new

2:17:04ones.

2:17:09This slide showed or shows the twenty-six proposed new policies. So building on the major update that I just covered, these new proposed policies in the Pasco Place chapter include policies that address LOS or level of service requirements and deficiencies in both neighborhood parks and parks in urban areas. That's 1.1.4, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9.

2:17:41We have also added strong focus on greenways, trails, blue ways connectivity with capital improvements planning, design standards, and user policy guidance. And that's in 1.2.1. It's actually scattered throughout um the document. So you got 1.2.1. Uh one point two point eleven, one point two point ten, one point two point eight. We also have

2:18:12added a new objective. One point eight. that focuses um or addresses policies um with policies that address excuse me that address expanding recreational programming and recreational tourism. One important policy that I wanted to highlight is 1.2.3. This policy addresses the Greenway Corridor Opportunity Zones that

2:18:42can serve as the foundation for future trail and ecological connections.

2:18:53That's all I have. And we can go ahead and

2:18:56Mr. Chairman this time.

2:19:01I only have two comments. I suspect Mr. Moody will have more than two.

2:19:08Actually one one one more slide.

2:19:10I don't know, that depends on what your comments are.

2:19:13I have one more slide left. So I just wanted to highlight that, of course, the new policies that we have added and also updates to the existing policies, they were reviewed directly and responded to the community's priorities of expanding the park system. We have reinforced the requirement of neighborhood parks in development of more than 25 dwelling units, and that's something that we have. heard from the community and we also focused on developing a well connected network with

2:19:43the Greenway um corridor opportunity zones and also a connected greenway um blue way um and trails network.

2:19:53And we have Tammy and Jay from Parks Department to help us answer any of your questions. They have been instrumental in helping us update this chapter. So we're all here to address whatever questions and whatever concerns you may have.

2:20:12Okay. I only have two. Oh

2:20:14that's good.

2:20:15I'm gonna start by saying I don't care what Mr. Moody says, I think you all did a good job with this one.

2:20:19Thank you.

2:20:20Since I only have two comments. Um That's good. The my question is um and one point four point one point one point four Um I guess I need Tammy's help on this one because when we did the update to the parks and recreation impact fee, we came up with very specific language about what that fee would do in terms of meeting level service requirements in it that that's all outlined in one point one point two

2:20:51which you didn't change any of that so that's You did the deal that we kind of cut with the development community on concurrency as it relates to the impact fee is remains in place. However, I'm concerned that one point one point four sort of undercuts that because it says Pasco County should require private developers when a future land use amendment is proposed to review concurrency requirements and to provide land for the concurrency requirement if the LOS threshold is triggered. So My

2:21:22concern with that is that one point one point two was very clear about that We weren't going to do that for natural resources parks because that standard was met through the impact fee and penny for Pasco. And then for other parks, we were only gonna the the impact fee was not gonna meet concurrency only to the extent it was, you know, basically large Area plans or master plans, you know, a thousand units or more, or outside of a five mile or Um

2:21:54Distance of a community or district park. Well, some of these future land use amendments in 1.1.4 may be like the one we just heard. Okay, like it's literally going to res one and it's 10 units. And so that seems inconsistent with the deal that we cut in one point one point two to say that all future land use amendments are now gonna have to go through this. concurrency level service analysis, even if they you know they're small or they're they don't meet W what was you

2:22:24know, we decided in a one point one point two. In other words I feel like we're we we're tracking the deal that we cut when we got the park impact fee approved, that we made a representation that this would mostly satisfy concurrency, except for those limited cases where it was, you know, sort of like a brand new bill just at Passen Hills in the rural area or something like that where So I I feel like some whoever put one point one point four in there, you're kinda retracting on the deal you cut. So

2:22:54help me out.

2:22:55David, now you don't have to hear me

2:22:57because you just expressed the same ones

2:22:58I had

2:22:58highlighted here for you.

2:23:01one.

2:23:07Parks planning manager with Pasco County Parks Wreck and Natural Resources. Um I I don't think that that's the way we are looking at that. If it undercuts it, I think that's a fantastic point and I think we need to reword it. I think our intent in that was actually just to repeat the importance of the concurrency requirements.

2:23:29Well, I guess my question is why do you need it at all? I mean One point one point two is very clear about when you're going to When the parks and recreation impact fee does not satisfy concurrency. In other words it's it it's you really you're just basically saying I'm only gonna look at concurrency now that we have this fairly large impact fee I'm only gonna look at concurrency if you're in you're in this unique situation where it's a very large project, it's you know, not close to any community park So if

2:24:00you've already said that, that's the case whether it's a future Landings Amendment or an M P U D or whatever. So I don't know. I guess what I'm saying is why do you need one point one point four at all?

2:24:09Yeah, I understand your point. Um Honestly, I don't have a good response for that. So I think it's something that we need to look back at and perhaps strike if it's not needed.

2:24:19That would be my recommendation as easy three.

2:24:23Okay, then my only other question is um

2:24:30related to the last three policies which talk about maintenance. So is the intent of these I guess it's an objective in two policies. Is the intent of these maintenance standards for county parks or is it for All parks.

2:24:48It's for county parks. So it's for county parks. And really what we're trying to do is we're trying to hold ourselves accountable and making sure that we maintain our infrastructure. Um a lot um the more we have in the comp plan, obviously, the easier it is for us to defend getting funding in the future.

2:25:09Yeah, so I don't have a problem if you're gonna restrict.

2:25:13I'm more concerned if you're gonna create maintenance standards for C D D parks and HOA park I mean I I mean

2:25:24No, to answer your question, I the intent of that was for our parks.

2:25:29Then I think you should make you should use the word county parks in each of those it should say establish maintenance standards and plans to ensure county park facilities and equipment are routinely reviewed. How And then Pasco County show established County meetings and opera I mean, just make all of those objectives and policies apply to just county parks.

2:25:54Yeah. Sorry.

2:25:55Just make it clear that all of that objective one point ten, one point ten policy one point ten point one and one point ten point two only apply to county Parts.

2:26:06Noted. Okay.

2:26:07Yeah, one point ten point two should it doesn't say parks at all, so shouldn't otherwise you promote all infrastructure.

2:26:14But that's even less clear, yeah. That definitely is the state

2:26:19county

2:26:19parks. Okay.

2:26:20Okay, understood. Thank you.

2:26:26Oh my

2:26:26god. Mm-hmm.

2:26:28Okay.

2:26:32Don't know anywhere.

2:26:37Residents except those in the northeast Pasco rural area, Maniera, should have access to parks within their neighborhood, and be able to walk or bike to a park within one mile of their home. In the Nera Residents should have access to a park within a 5-mile radius.

2:26:58Who's

2:26:59decided

2:27:03What the frequency of a neighborhood park should be that one mile walk or bike within one mile of their home.

2:27:11Um,

2:27:12and that may be

2:27:15reasonable in places And I'm thinking about my own neighborhood. Well we all live out on property bigger than an acre. And my bigger problem is is the way we want to fund these one mile parks is through MSBUs.

2:27:34Why do I need a neighborhood park when I already live in a park?

2:27:40Good question.

2:27:41Okay, not every place, not all of us choose to live in forty foot wide lot subdivisions that need neighborhood parks. And don't get me wrong, I'm not against neighborhood parks. I grew up as a kid having to play in the street 'cause there was no neighborhood park. So I understand why we have that.

2:28:02But I also think We need to go back and look at our neighborhood parks ordinance. and understand that one size does not fit all. We just have a blanket statement. If you have more than twenty five dwelling units, you must have a neighborhood park of at least one acre that meets these minimum dimensional criteria. And then we have to come in every time the land use attorneys come in here, we have to give 'em twenty-nine alternative

2:28:32standards from Sunday to change it because that section of the code is one size fits all and does not work. I'd like to see a policy where we will go and amend that that will require neighborhood parks as needed for those neighborhoods. There are other neighborhoods. I'm thinking of one of the commissioners neighborhoods. The same thing. That commissioner basically lives in a park. Why w in fact they live in a park next to a park? named after themselves. Why

2:29:03would they need a neighborhood park?

2:29:07This doesn't make sense. That level of service standard seems a bit excessive. I don't think anybody expects that everybody in the county is going to be served by a neighborhood park and then have an MSBU assessed against their residents to pay for a park. My bigger concern is that this is setting what I believe to be an unreasonable standard. And this is a policy statement, right? I'm gonna use these MSTUs and MSBUs

2:29:38to make sure that my residents have access to a park they can bike or walk to within one mile of their home.

2:29:47I'm not afraid of the five commissioners I got. I'm not worried about them passing an MSBU and forcing a park down my throat. I'm worried about the one ten commissions from now that might do that. Can I

2:30:00ask a question, just to follow up on Mr. May's question? If you're Talking about a making amendments to the neighborhood parks ordinance anyway. Why not address this distance requirement for Northeast Rural and why not put that in the Land Development Code so that

2:30:22So I'm gonna use your own words against you. Yeah. This is this is very detailed and the problem with that level of detail in the comp plan is that if you want to deviate it from it, we don't have a variance or variation or alternative standard process for the comp plan. So It seems to me that it would be better to regulate distance walking distance to neighborhood parks through the land development code than the Comp Land. And I would add, and you guys to address Mr. Commissioner Weightman's other concern, maybe

2:30:52you add a statement to one point one point six

2:30:58Which right now just says you're gonna continue to implement Maybe you add something says that Pasco County shall consider um amendments to these land development regulations to address You know, unique development forms or areas of the county or something to that effect so that 'Cause it sounds like you're gonna do that anyway. Right. So you you might as well put that in the comp plan that you're considering amendments to to kinda tailor the neighbor park requirements to unique Circumstances.

2:31:29Okay. And just to clarify where we got the one mile to, I I feel like we I need to to address that. So that is the national park standards. And so what we're trying to do is is get our park system in line with what the national standards are. So a lot of the language, not just that that you say.

2:31:51The national standards set by

2:31:53So there is a it is called the natural um natural recreation and park association. Um and so NERPA, I don't know if we've ever heard of it, but um so they also have an accreditation uh accreditation.

2:32:08Government has government has a bad habit of doing this. We go out and we create a Association to fit our we we self-anoint ourselves as the expert and decide what the standard should be for everybody. And we create these associations that well who are these people you don't know who these people are. I don't know who these people are. What's their qualification to tell me how often there should be a park? So To follow

2:32:36up on my thought. I'm not gonna criticize you like Commissioner Moody. I'm just suggesting or I'm not gonna even criticize what organization you relied on. All I'm suggesting is take it out of the Com plan and then add a general statement that you what you intend to do in the Land Development Code. And you could even say, including areas like the Northeast Pasco Ruler, that you would address that in your amendments so that Mm-hmm. There's an intent to address North you

2:33:01know,

2:33:01the standards for the northeast Pasco rural area when you do these amendments.

2:33:05Okay. I think we can do that.

2:33:09I'll

2:33:09try to phrase this one in the form of a question.

2:33:16So you said in coordination with the school board, et cetera. Is that Is that Where your We have agreements to use our facilities, is that what you're speaking to there?

2:33:28Yeah, exactly. Or you know, joint use or yeah, where we have agreements. Yes. Right. Mm-hmm. And just so because public land, taxpayer money, so it it makes sense to use other land, right? Yeah.

2:33:45One point one point eight.

2:33:50Have we come up with a definition for Green spaces.

2:33:57And I know that's going to come up as we talk about the conserves and adapts. sections of the code or comp plan later on another day. There's a lot of debate about this.

2:34:15the policy in general I don't have an issue with. What what I'm I'm trying to understand, we're specifically talking about the West Market area which needs redevelopment. It says redevelopment projects should include provisions for newer expanded neighborhood parks, green spaces and recreational facilities to meet the needs of current and future residents. It's great, it's noble. I'm trying to figure out Where do we go? How

2:34:46do I tell a shopping center developer he needs to put in a neighborhood park or a recreational facility? Redevelopment in the West Market area isn't going to mean mowing down embassy hills. It's going to mean redeveloping Embassy Plaza.

2:35:04And so I'm not sure that this is really applicable other than perhaps green spaces. I could see where we could incorporate green spaces, but I think there needs to be a definition of what that is. That could mean a lot of things.

2:35:19Maybe we do something like redevelopment residential

2:35:23redevelopment projects.

2:35:24Projects. That might clarify that.

2:35:27Gotcha. We'll cut to Mr. Moody's other point. I agree with him on this one too. Complete agreement on this element. Um my concern with the phrase green spaces is I don't remember this is the plays element. Okay, so presumably that means it's where is rec people where people can recreate.

2:35:47Mm-hmm.

2:35:48But concern with the term green spaces, a wetland could arguably be considered a green space. Um a very dense tree stand going back to our earlier discussion, could be considered a green space. But it may not be ideal for recoring or playing. So if your intent is

2:36:11you know, spaces where people can recreate. You need to be clear about the dev that's what you mean by green I'm not even sure green space is the best term for that, but but Maybe you mean trails, maybe I I I don't know what you mean but but it needs a definition because otherwise it's arguably including things that where people can't play.

2:36:33That's true. Okay.

2:36:35And so if you're gonna call this the plays element, not my idea. That was somebody else's idea. Um because it used to be recreation and open space element. Okay, well if it was open space, you don't necessarily need to play in open space. But we've redefined this as where people play. So if you're now that we've done that. I think it needs to this policy need and all needs to be limited to spaces where people can recreate and play.

2:37:02Mm-hmm.

2:37:04Which greens is arguably more than

2:37:08David, this'll go to One point five and recreational and one point five point one and I'm not sure that this is the appropriate section of the comp plan for this to be in Objective Plays One point five common open space.

2:37:28It says protect open space lands from incompatible land uses and maintain the function and value of such lands as resources for passive recreation opportunities.

2:37:40And then the following policy, Pasco County shall continue to define and preserve as open space areas, those areas designated as conservation lands on the future land use map, jurisdictional wetlands and associated upland buffers, ecological corridors, environmental lands acquisition, man program lands, significant habitats of threatened endangered species. Land management areas for species of special concern where appropriate, Pasco County utilize such areas for

2:38:10passive recreation. Does this belong here?

2:38:16It's a good point. I mean 'cause again we're now this is now the plays element. Now I do think that passive recreation is still a form of play. I mean So I I don't think that Where this where this policy may be getting a little over the edge is it's got things like jurisdictional wetlands in it. Well I

2:38:38not sure how much passive recreation occurs in a wetland. I I I mean, you tell me if you think that's from

2:38:45Well what does that mean? What's passive recreation?

2:38:49Well, I view passive recreation is it's it's by you know, mountain biking or um you know, bird watching. I mean the uh but people are still th but but the difference the reason I call it jurisdiction wetlands is I'm not even sure people are walking into wetlands to do these things. Like an upland habitat or an ecological corridor, people can walk through them and, you know, or bike through them or fish or I mean that's still a form of recreation. I maybe you can fish

2:39:19in a wetland, I don't know. Maybe maybe it's um Well. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you can fish in a wetland. Can you?

2:39:26Well I don't know what they mean by

2:39:31passive recreation. To me, riding your bike is active recreation.

2:39:36I think it's you tell me if I'm wrong, it's recreation that does never doesn't necessarily disturb the natural environment. It's it's enjoying the natural environment. So Fishing

2:39:47It's

2:39:48less intensive

2:39:49hiking, um, fishing, as you said, just less less land intensive. So no ballparks. You wouldn't put a field in something you would call passive.

2:40:00So I do think this list should only include areas where open spaces where people can possibly recreate if if If wetlands you can fish in a wetland, I guess I'm okay leaving it in. I

2:40:13think about fishing.

2:40:17It says protect dedicated open space lands from incompatible land uses and maintain the function and value of such lands. as resources for passive recreation. The The issue of passive recreation belongs in this element. I'm not sure about compatibility what what necessarily constitutes an incompatible land use and that's something that's probably better done in the future land use element and or conservation

2:40:47element.

2:40:52Seems like we're just trying to mix it mix and match different Objectives.

2:40:58Okay. Where are you seeing the incompatible land use port? I'm and maybe I'm missing.

2:41:02Maybe this is where they have the Oh it's here. It's on the screen. Objective place.

2:41:08Oh you're in one point five I was looking at one point five point one. Okay. Right. Protect dedicated open space from incompatible languages.

2:41:28Okay, remember you're saying that that should be in pastoral growth. I'm saying

2:41:34issues of compatibility don't seem to fit in the recreation portion of the comprehensive plan. The whole issue of using these lands for passive recreation purposes makes perfect sense to me to be in this section. I'm just not sure we should be Addressing what becomes incompatible.

2:41:54in this particular section.

2:42:00And we haven't defined either

2:42:01what's in comparison.

2:42:06I get your point. It's arguably could be in this po in this chapter though because they're saying you want to protect your open space areas for passive recreation. If you had some incompatible land use that was

2:42:25I mean, theoretically let's just say some I can't think of what would be there probably could be some use that goes right next to Starkey Preserve that somebody would say that's incompatible with that. Period. Yes. So

2:42:44Are you suggesting that that statement should be in

2:42:46Castle Gross? Maybe better in the future land use rather than the recreational aspect. Yes, I think.

2:42:55So is there a similar okay let me ask you a question I'll ask is there a similar policy in Grows?

2:43:00There is, yes. And just to remind Planning Commissioners that this is the parks rec the recreation and open space element per um the requirement in the Florida statutes. So we are required to have these policies about preservation. Yeah.

2:43:20I don't think he's I don't think he's disputing that. His question is because one point five point one does that. Right. The question is in one point five

2:43:30About the incompatible land uses.

2:43:35He's asking whether that should be regulated through Pasco Rows as opposed to Pasco Plays.

2:43:40May maybe let me phrase it another way. I'm trying to figure out David made the example of what should not be constructed next to Starkey Park.

2:43:52that type of issue I think goes in the grows the future land issues of compati neighborhood compatibility. Neighboring property compatibility belongs in that state. That's why I asked if

2:44:04there's the same thing.

2:44:05When we're talking about an incompatible land use, like I'm not going to come in and put a concrete batch plant on top of my dedicated open space land well because I'm preserving it for passive recreation, well then that makes sense in this element.

2:44:22Let me ask the question in a different way. If somebody came in with a concrete batch plant next to Starkey Wilderness Park would planting even know to look in this element or would they be looking at something in the grows element? I mean

2:44:38And to that point, what I'm concerned about this one of the things I've seen with the current Com plan is that we've got policies all over the place and they tend sometimes they tend to conflict and we come in here and I see when the people come in for rezoning and comp plan amendments and then we we cite all of the comp plan policies to support why we should approve this application. And then I can go in the same comp plan and find ten contradictory

2:45:09policies to that. So I'm trying to make sure that there's consistency and that we're looking in obvious places and I don't want someone coming and appealing a land use decision because, oh well look what I found buried in the place element to overturn that recent rezoning we did. So

2:45:30Good.

2:45:30I guess the question re the ultimately the question is if there there's identical language in grows, can it be struck from place?

2:45:44We can. I will have to double check. Yes. I'll have to double check grows if w I I believe we do, but I can't remember from top of my head right now, but I I will definitely double check and then

2:45:58it's a simple solution. If it's there isn't you could just take this policy and move it over to growth.

2:46:03Right and sure. And then I think though, because the word open space appears in the one line in the statute that's supposed to be in this element, it's actually mentioned twice. Right. Um in the one sentence. Four lines long. Um the references in open space. So what we could do, we've done this elsewhere, is we actually say this is handled more

2:46:24as mentioned or as reference in whatever chapter.

2:46:29Like once again, checking the box for the agency. Right, yes, sure. Our open space element recognizes open space, but we handle it over in close. So that would be my suggestion.

2:46:38And then back to the definitions, like we asked if there was a definition of open space in Objective plays 1.6. Now we use a different term that I haven't seen a definition for, that's natural areas.

2:46:53Natural.

2:46:54What differentiates an open space from a natural area or a conservation area? I hadn't seen that term before.

2:47:04Plays one point six.

2:47:11And it was a term that was added and

2:47:14So

2:47:17I read that as we have public lands all over the place, including our ecological corridors, and this is just saying that we will Because these natural areas maybe Not all of them may be suitable for recreation.

2:47:33I just didn't understand whether we were trying to define a new term, that's all.

2:47:38I think they intentionally used a term that is more broad than open space and recreation because not all natural areas are appropriate for recreation and open space.

2:47:49Mm-hmm.

2:47:50Well, we seem to have traded conservation area for natural area.

2:48:04And then I only have I'm not sure what term you want us to use instead.

2:48:07I'm d I'm not. I

2:48:08was

2:48:08asking if you're tr attempting to define a new term. If you are, then what's the definition of it? I don't have a problem if we define a natural area and if that's something we want to do.

2:48:25I mean, you could just rewrite the policy to say evaluate public lands within the county for recreation and open space activities because I think our board is always looking for any I mean we just had a conversation about converting a util piece of utilities property to a park. So w I mean, maybe the better thing would just be to just say evalue of public lands within the county for recreation and open space activity just don't even say natural herbs.

2:48:54Mm-hmm.

2:48:55Utility stands, huh? Any county owned land is fair game for a potential park at some point. Down at the Sewage Street and playing a little picnic? Uh in Fortunately, they got a soccer they got a soccer fill on the whole window. Maybe there's some landfills that we can convert to uh

2:49:09One last one, David. Serious mountain

2:49:14planting a landfill.

2:49:16Um I d this is a language one you You can wordsmith it better probably. This is under Plays One Points Four, Bonding and Municipal Service Taxing Units. I noticed the use of the word should consider.

2:49:35I don't know if it's you mean shall consider, might consider, may consider.

2:49:41One point nine point four.

2:49:42Which number Should sound like that's someone's opinion. You you should do this. Exist

2:49:47it's existing language.

2:49:49Says Pasco County should consider the use of bonding and municipal service taxing units to provide for the funding of capital maintenance improvements.

2:49:58You wanted to see Shell? No.

2:50:03Just didn't know about that term. I think it's f I mean we are in fact doing these things.

2:50:09Yes, and I think I think you imply I think we imply in the sections I commented about above that yeah you're already intending to in institute MSTUs and MSBUs to

2:50:20This is an ongoing conversation with Board of County Commissioners. Trust me, it's every year we have this conversation.

2:50:29I think it I'm comfortable with the word should. Okay.

2:50:36Should consider that's exactly what our board is doing.

2:50:39All the time.

2:50:46And then I did get a Kick out of this. in the potential new definitions Um we don't have a definition we have an issue of green spaces but not open space. But then in neighborhood parks we are creating a definition which is inconsistent with our own land development code. The minimum size neighborhood park in our L and development code is an acre. This one says at least a half an acre.

2:51:15Were you out?

2:51:16At the very bottom of the on potential new definitions.

2:51:21Oh.

2:51:26Um

2:51:32I don't think I have it yet.

2:51:38Okay, alright.

2:51:41So they were parks.

2:51:46He

2:51:46said this is yeah.

2:51:48Hi. Hi, I'm sorry.

2:51:51My name is JN. I'm the senior um planner at Parks and Rag and Natural Resources. So this speaks to size. So it's um consistent with the Landman code, which says the minimum size of a park, neighbor park should be half an acre. But the total part will be um added together will be one acre.

2:52:13Because the neighbor parks for it allows you to count. Sort of trails around the the the size of the actual park is no is uh half an acre.

2:52:26Just have to work on the section of the land development code, that's all.

2:52:36It's not a debate, it's just a comment.

2:52:41Noted.

2:52:46That's what you normally do. I didn't want to keep you here all afternoon. So when the county gives you that's what you guys do when the county gives you noted.

2:52:57Yeah.

2:53:06I have no more comments.

2:53:07No more comments,

2:53:08Mr. Modena?

2:53:10Okay, great.

2:53:10Well, you know, Faker, if I'm gonna come and take the day off the entire day out of work to come down here. I'm not coming down here just to put in FaceTime. I'm coming down here to get something done and talk about these things. So yes.

2:53:24Appreciate that.

2:53:25I You can expect that I'm going to go through and read these and highlight and ask my questions.

2:53:31That's the intent, yes, thank you. We do appreciate the time you put in for this.

2:53:34So talking about the the grows versus plays, when we were talking about open space the influencing open space and developments, is that gonna be is that handled in the grows or is that Sure.

2:53:55Okay, so I'm not sure if you understand the question. So

2:53:59Or is it just in the land or is it just in the DC? What we're talking about. Uh open space requirements within

2:54:07Okay, so th there are neighborhood there's a neighborhood park requirement in the LDC. Right. That is where the detailed that was the conversation we had earlier that the detailed regulations related to that should be in the LDC. Right. The com plan is setting I mean all it says as it relates to that is that we will implement a neighboring parks regul but it the details of that are in the code.

2:54:28Okay. I

2:54:30don't I don't and that was kind of Commissioner Moody's point and my point that those details really belong in the Like how how far of a walking distance and how many acres and things like that should

2:54:41belong

2:54:42in the code as opposed to the

2:54:43columns. to the point. Neighborhood parks provide close to home recreation opportunities. Period.

2:54:53Yeah.

2:54:54I don't I don't think a size and things, those are things that are left to the land.

2:54:59Yeah, I mean I'm not sure I see 'cause it says typically half an acre, I mean I'm not sure that that is regulatory I mean, 'Cause the c the code is very specific on what the size has to be and also has an alternative standard process. If something says it's typically half an acre, that means it could be smaller or it could be bigger. I don't If it's at a minimum of a half acre, maybe I think it'll have more gallant point. typically just means that's about what they tend

2:55:29to be.

2:55:31My concern for all that is again, I'm not worried about the five commissioners I got. It's the one that's ten commissions down the road from now. that decide they need to find a half acre in my neighborhood. to create a neighborhood park. If I want a half acre that's within walking distance or biking distance of my house, I can walk out my back door. I don't need that. Not everybody needs that, that's all.

2:55:58Well, there's a general rule that definitions are not regulatory. I mean we try not to regulate through definitions. So I read that definition is simply

2:56:14Our office tries to do everything we can to make sure that they're not regulating through definitions. Um I don't read that definition as regulatory. Okay. I read it as this is generally describing what we mean by neighborhood park.

2:56:29That's fine.

2:56:35Okay. Okay, so I do have one more question because now that Mr. Moody raised it for sorry, I now I thought we were gonna blame it on me. Now that he raised it for plays, I have a question going back to Liz.

2:56:50He made a good point about compatibility is really a Rose issue. So those in the LIVS, remember that policy I talked about that talks about the siding of community residential homes? Mm-hmm.

2:57:05You may want to evaluate whether that really belongs in lives. Maybe it belongs in Rose.

2:57:16if we got a zoning application in for a community residential home that any that

2:57:24What I've seen tend to happen is the planners tend to look at the future land use element for for grows. They don't really look at something at a citing criteria that would be in Libs. So you might want to consider taking the citing criteria for community residential homes and moving them over to grows.

2:57:47Okay. I will just have to double check the statutes to see if there are no requirements for Having any citing citing criteria in Lives and then I will make sure to

2:57:59Yeah, assuming it's not statutory required to be in Lives

2:58:05I'll be I'm just gonna be straightforward with you. I've seen a number of conditional use applications come in for these facilities. I do not once ever remember planning signing to those policies. Okay. And I I think it's because it's in the lit the housing element, not in future land use. And so they don't they may not even realize it's there.

2:58:23Okay. Okay. Good point.

2:58:29Now, if you tell me that the zoner, zoning people and planning people are going to start reading the entire comp plan, for every zoning application that comes in, I may have a different opinion, but that's not what I see occurring.

2:58:46Noted. Thank you.

2:58:53Thank you, I'm

2:58:54thank you so much. Thank you Commissioner for your time. Just

2:58:57a quick quick question. And I'm not trying to criticize our county's comprehensive plan by asking this question.

2:59:09We have

2:59:12State statutes which set forth minimum requirements for inclusion in the comprehensive plan if I understood Elizabeth correctly.

2:59:24When I go to the city of Port Ritchie's comprehensive plan, it's like twenty pages. The entire comprehensive plan. I think New Port Richey's is about a hundred. Why is ours? Like two thousand. I don't understand that. Why do we find the need to make it so much more complicated?

2:59:51I think one of the issues in the current comprehensive plan is that you have a lot of duplication. So there's a lot of policies that are re repeated between the the Watt policies and the flu policies and the

3:00:05And that's what I was getting at before in you know, and I think David just said the same thing. You're not gonna go think to look in this section to for this or that.

3:00:17I would like to see this a document. I get all kinds of calls from people asking development and growth questions and they're shocked. When I point them to the documents and they're like, I'm supposed to read all this to understand what I can do to build on my property? Yeah.

3:00:39Yeah, I I mean one of the efforts that were as I mentioned a couple months ago, um one of the efforts of this comprehensive plan update is to streamline it, reduce duplication throughout the document, concentrate the policies specifically to chapters like David's comment was a good catch to, hey look maybe we should move this one over into grows from Lives. I mean that's that's the kind of stuff that we've been trying to catch and and move around and streamline the comprehensive plan a little bit so that People

3:01:10move it people look at the one part of the document that they really need to reference and they get all their information from there.

3:01:17Yes, I would hope that that's what we would end up with as a final product.

3:01:20And Mr. Moody, I I was thinking about maybe having an FAQ for people and just kind of a a gu a guide a guideline to where they can find things if you want to build a home or a business or this and that. That's a great idea. Uh gives people direction because they're lay people and they should have access and understand the material.

3:01:41Yeah, very good idea. Right.

3:01:42Thank you.

3:01:48Okay. Is there anything else?

3:01:49Well while we're talking about that, I guess we talk about I know there was an email that went out earlier this week about remaining days and it was like six days and eighteen hours worth of additional time over the next three weeks. I'm assuming that's to go over the other nine sections of the comprehensive plan, is that correct? Was that the intent?

3:02:10Yeah, the intent is to try to get through all of the chapters within the month. 'Cause

3:02:14I I mean I I think these were probably two of the easier ones we did today and we're pretty much right on that two hours per chapter. I guess I I'm trying to look at this and I'm willing to sit here and go through this stuff but I mean th this is a lot. I mean, if if I'm gonna actively participate in this, I'm gonna read the stuff. So I mean there's probably if I sit here for two hours I'm probably at least reviewing stuff at home for two hours. Yeah. So that's I mean that's thirty six almost forty hours over the next three weeks.

3:02:47I I I mean Okay I'll dye um I mean it's A Museu reasonable why we're cramming all this stuff into these next three weeks? I thought we

3:02:56had to have this done by October, so that the commissioners could vote and adopt this thing in November. And I was Jamie, I I have the same sentiment. I saw that and I'm like, Hey, wait a minute guys. I I got a business to run.

3:03:11So we probably need to discuss that with staff because I did ask Elizabeth the question, you know, does our current comm plan just go away if it doesn't get adopted by the end of this year? And her answer was no. It stays in effect. It's not like it we lose the com plan if we don't adopt it by the end of the year. So what what is what is the urgency? Is it a what is creating the urgency? Is it is it because of the consultant contract or is it or is there something else that

3:03:40Well you th the the the project plan was to have it complete before the end of calendar year twenty five. So it is set by the the the project plan Um There's no state requirement that's pushing us to do it by the end of twenty-five, obviously. doing it to us. We we're the deadline is our own. W that's a Pasco County control deadline in that sense. Um I will say though that the additional layer is that the strategic the county

3:04:10strategic plan has identified the same timeline. So um it sort of trumped our project timeline which put the urgency on us a little bit more to get this done in time in the same time frame that the Pasco County strategic plan required. So that was That's the that's the urgency, I suppose.

3:04:31But we're not penalized in any way if it's

3:04:34No not from the state or anyone anyone else.

3:04:37Yeah, if we're a a month later, then I don't think it's an egregious violation of the county strategic plan.

3:04:43Well at the last planning commission mean we we talked about doing workshops before and that's why frankly I was a little surprised to see Five additional workshops in addition to the one more at the next planning commission meeting? I mean all crammed in the next three weeks?

3:05:00So look let me sit down with staff and we'll come up with an alternative schedule. We we do want to keep expediting our processing, but we want to be reasonable to the time and the attention of the Planning Commission.

3:05:10Well I I'd be willing, I mean while we're betting up here, I'd I'd be willing to bet we don't make it through grows in two hours. You

3:05:16never know.

3:05:22Yeah, but

3:05:28I don't see the red light on it.

3:05:31Well I mean staff defense for today. Yeah, yeah, that that's fine. So they these are the first two, so now they have a better indication of what it's gonna take to get through an easy chapter. So now they wanna delve over a workshop between the Now they could probably plan accordingly and and provide hopefully more time for the future chapter based on their level of complexity. Yeah.

3:05:54Multiplier.

3:05:55We'll uh we'll work with David and uh you know put together a schedule and and share.

3:06:08You know, quickly before these workshops and so

3:06:16And since we're talking about

3:06:20us too.

3:06:20And since we're talking about burdens, it

3:06:22is

3:06:22an additional burden on us 'cause we're chasing cats around the county trying to get all the different departments to give us their all their inputs and time. So it's it's quite a bit of work on on the team here.

3:06:32Yeah, and I mean there's there's quite a bit of staff here for the whole day.

3:06:36Yeah.

3:06:37So where do we stand with the I mean, I guess will another email come out or

3:06:42we've

3:06:42got to be able to do that.

3:06:44I'm sorry.

3:06:45I think the the last email I saw was the thirteenth was the next meeting. Is that not a firm?

3:06:51Well it it's let me put it this way, it's easier to um reserve rooms and then just cancel off than it is to reserve at the last minute. So we we have a schedule of reservations. We'll work with David to determine uh the appropriate cadence for these uh workshop sessions and then we'll get back to you guys a as soon as possible.

3:07:12Okay. Okay. Can we get tentative invites for those times too, just so that's on our calendars? Yeah.

3:07:24Yeah we'll we'll send that out and it'll just be a tentative reservation, not necessarily a a confirmed meeting. Thanks, Pat.

3:07:33Thank you, Hayek.

3:07:43Okay. Is there anything else?

3:07:49Okay, since it's a workshop there's no reason to make a motion. Good job. Good job.

3:07:58David, I'm glad we put agree on something.

3:08:22and wildlife depend on you to keep them healthy. Excess fertilizer, grass clippings, trash, oils, and pet waste wash into gutters and storm drains when it rains. Storm water carries these pollutants directly into our lakes and rivers, creating an unhealthy environment for fish, waterfowl, and other aquatic animals. Storm drains are meant for clean rainwater. Most

3:08:57Homelessness has many definitions and because our funding comes from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, otherwise known as HUD, we go by their definition. It starts with people who are literally homeless. That can include people who are living in emergency shelters or transitional housing and hotels or motels, people living in cars, living in encampments or the woods, people in the streets, people in abandoned buildings. We also consider