The Laker/Lutz News

Serving Lutz since 1964 and Pasco since 1981.
Proud to be independently owned.

Barbara Wilhite

Pasco board looks to put pause on multifamily

By

The Pasco County Commission is considering a temporary pause on multifamily development in the central part of the county.

The board has directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would prohibit new applications for multifamily to be considered in an area bounded by State Road 54/State Road 56 on the south; State Road 52 on the north; U.S. 41 (Land O’ Lakes Boulevard) on the west; and Bruce B. Downs Boulevard and on the east.

The moratorium would take effect beginning on the date of the first public hearing — which has not been determined yet.

This 262-unit apartment development is being built off State Road 54, at Oak Grove Boulevard. The Pasco County Commission is pursuing a temporary moratorium on new multifamily development in the central part of Pasco County, to give commissioners a chance to get a better handle on how much of this type of development is already entitled in existing zonings. (B.C. Manion)

The idea is to give county staff time to research the number of existing entitlements for multifamily development and to report back to the board. Once the board has that information, it can decide how to proceed.

Board members voted 3-2 to support pursuing the temporary moratorium.

Commissioners Mike Moore, Christina Fitzpatrick and Jack Mariano voted yes; Commissioner Kathryn Starkey and Commission Chairman Ron Oakley voted no.

The vote came after extensive discussion, including analysis of Pasco County’s Class A market demand provided by Lesley Deutch, managing principal with John Burns Real Estate Consulting.

Deutch, who appeared on behalf of land use attorneys Joel Tew and Barbara Wilhite, told commissioners that demand for Class A apartments in Pasco County is expected to grow by about 5,380 over the next five years. She characterized that projection as a “conservative” estimate.

Nectarios Pittos, the county’s planning director, provided a presentation that reviewed the county’s policies regarding multifamily development.

“The compact nature of development requires less infrastructure; it’s less land, and so you are making use of existing infrastructure as much as possible,” Pittos said.

Commissioner Starkey cautioned against becoming too restrictive regarding the development of multifamily housing.

“We need to have some workforce housing,” Starkey said. “I am really getting concerned that we don’t pay enough attention to this part of our society, and they need to be integrated into all of our communities.”

Commissioner Moore said his district is becoming too saturated with multifamily development.

He has repeatedly warned against the long-range potential of having large apartment complexes that become less competitive over time wind up with high vacancy rates and ultimately fall into disrepair.

Commissioner Fitzpatrick has similar concerns.

“What’s going to happen 30 years from now?” Fitzpatrick asked, expressing worries about the prospect for crime.

But, Starkey said multifamily is needed to address today’s demand.

She said young professionals aren’t buying; they want to rent.

Starkey also noted: “There is a rise in trend of apartment dwellers being higher-income brackets.”

Noting that Pasco is an attractive area, Deutch said, “there’s a lot of growth in Pasco. Unless you want it to stop, you  have to have housing.”

Like Starkey, Deutch said that renting has become a much more popular choice than it was in the past.

Chairman Oakley said Deutch’s report was informative.

“I don’t see we’re overrun with apartments,” Oakley said.

But, Moore persisted: “We continue to change zoning on parcels, when we already have the inventory to meet the demand.

“The parcels are there, ready to be developed tomorrow. These guys already have the entitlements,” Moore said.

“Did you look at all of the parcels that have the entitlements for the future, when you did your study?” Moore asked Deutch.

Deutch responded: “No, I did not. That wasn’t part of the study.”

Starkey noted that it can take decades for a property with an entitlement to actually be developed.

Attorney Tew raised this issue with the board: “I’m concerned that the commission will get into picking winners and losers in the marketplace. That is not what the government is supposed to do.”

He also told board members: “I think this is very treacherous ground and really uncharted territory for this commission.”

The prospect of a moratorium, according to Tew, “will be an immediate buzz kill to your potential employers.”

But, Moore cited a number of other places — such as Illinois, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Ohio, Texas and other jurisdictions in Florida — where moratoriums on multifamily are either in place, or are being considered.

Mariano, like Moore, thinks the county needs a better understanding of its current level of entitlements.

“I’m really scared that we don’t know what our supply could be, if everything was going to be built out,” Mariano said.

In another action relating to multifamily development, commissioners directed staff to prepare changes to the county’s land development code to remove the possibility of developing multifamily, as a conditional use, in a commercial zoning district.

The goal is to preserve commercial land for commercial uses, according to Fitzpatrick, who made a motion to pursue the change.

Moore seconded the motion, which was approved on a 4-1 vote, with Starkey dissenting.

Published February 24, 2021

New light industrial, commercial approved

By

A rezoning has been approved on approximately 90 acres to clear the way for light industrial and commercial development, near the northeast corner of the intersection of Interstate 75 and Blanton Road.

The Pasco County Commission unanimously approved changing the zoning on the land from agricultural, agricultural resident and general commercial to general commercial and light industrial.

The applicant proposes to develop the southern 14.66-acre portion of the property in conformance with general commercial standards and the northern 74.41-acre

portion of the property in conformance with the light industrial park standards.

The applicant has volunteered to record these deed restrictions:

  • Commercial uses in the general commercial district shall not exceed 140,000 square feet
  • Multi-family apartments are prohibited
  • No auto towing services are allowed, or the connected storage of vehicles
  • No yard trash disposal facilities are allowed
  • No construction and demolition debris disposal facilities are allowed
  • Truck stops shall be prohibited

On the light industrial portion of the property, restrictions include:

  • Light industrial uses are capped at 500,000 square feet
  • No yard trash disposal facilities are allowed
  • No construction and demolition debris disposal facilities are allowed

Some conditions also spell out how the property should be developed.

For instance:

  • The architectural design of building facades facing I-75 shall include windows at ground level and/or at clerestory and shall not include overhead doors.
  • Outside storage of any materials, supplies, or products shall not be permitted in the front of any structure
  • When outside storage is exposed to I-75, these areas shall be screened to a height at least 1-foot higher than the highest material being screened
  • Loading docks, utility meters, HVAC equipment, trash dumpsters, trash compaction, and other service functions shall be incorporated into the overall design of the primary building using screening walls of compatible material, style and color.

Edward Dutkiewicz, appearing for Cynthia Dutkiewicz of 32710 Blueberry Hill Way in Dade City, outlined seven reasons why the rezoning should be denied.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite, representing the applicant, said Dutkiewicz’s objections were a misapplication of language from the county’s comprehensive land use plan.

She also pointed out the rezoning prohibits multifamily development.

“We thought the better use of the property was to have no residential, to maximize the use of the property for the employment-generating uses,” Wilhite said.

Commissioner Mike Moore spoke in favor of the rezoning.

“We talk about wanting and needing more industrial for the county. Unfortunately, we’re actually losing many industrial sites, where people are rezoning from industrial sites to something that’s not a job-creating site. And this is right on Interstate 75, which is obviously the access you want for tractor-trailer trucks,” Moore said. “This is exactly what you want to do at an interstate interchange.”

Commissioner Kathryn Starkey agreed with Moore’s assessment — calling the proposed site a great location for that type of use.

Published February 17, 2021

Pasco commissioners clash on apartment request

By

A divided Pasco County Commission has continued a request for a conditional use that would allow a maximum of 248 apartments on the west side of Bruce B. Downs Boulevard, south of Eagleston Boulevard.

Adventist Health Systems Sunbelt Healthcare Corporation submitted the request, but the hospital chain intends to sell the 16.24-acre site to an apartment developer.

The land currently is zoned for commercial uses.

Development of apartments is allowed in the commercial zoning district, but the applicant first must secure a conditional use permit from the county.

Debate on the request at the county board’s Jan. 12 meeting revealed that commissioners are not on the same page, when it comes to this request.

In a departure from routine, the hearing also included a fairly detailed refresher from Nectarios Pittos, the county’s director of planning and development, relating to the board’s directive on  future apartment development along the State Road 54/State Road 56 corridor.

That directive does not apply to the property in question.

Still, Pittos went over many of the statistics relating to apartments that were included in the board’s workshop on apartments in February 2020.

The proposed apartment development would be built next the BayCare Hospital Wesley Chapel, which is expected to open in early 2023.

The new multifamily development features three four-story buildings, with a total of 248 units, according to Pete Pensa, a professional planner from AVID Group, representing the applicant. The site plan calls for active and passive recreation areas, the preservation of a significant amount of open space, and a connection to an existing multi-use trail on Bruce B. Downs Boulevard.

Pensa also noted that the current zoning would allow uses that would generate more traffic than the requested zoning would create.

Representatives from the future BayCare Hospital Wesley Chapel and Blue Heron Senior Living, neighbors to the proposed apartment complex, both submitted letters of support for the project.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite, representing the apartment developer, noted that the proposed use meets the criteria in the comprehensive plan and land development code.

She also cited a recommendation of approval for the request from the Pasco County Planning Commission.

Commissioners Mike Moore and Jack Mariano, however, opposed the request.

Moore made a motion for denial, citing sections of the county’s land development code and land use plan that relate to economic development.

“The proposed conditional for multifamily will consume land and transportation capacity that the county must ensure is available for employment-generating land uses,” Moore said.

Mariano supported Moore’s motion.

The proposed development would be located directly on an arterial roadway, Mariano said, “with the connection that we have right there, it screams for something commercial — a job generator.”

Moore and Mariano weren’t the only ones opposed to the proposed apartments.

Seven emails in opposition were read into the record, and 17 other emails in opposition were received and filed.

Commissioner Kathryn Starkey and Commission Chairman Ron Oakley, however, said the site seems suitable for apartments.

Starkey said the site is close to two transportation corridors and it also is within walking distance to nearby jobs.

While Moore has repeatedly complained that the area is oversaturated with apartments, Starkey disagreed with Moore’s position.

“I’m not sure this area is overbuilt for this price point. I think most of the housing around here is actually very expensive,” Starkey said.

Oakley said an apartment development on the site makes sense.

“I think the project fits,” Oakley said. “I don’t think the traffic would be a problem. I don’t think there’s going to be any issues with the schools. And, I think it fits in the neighborhood where it’s located. It’s a good project, as far as I’m concerned.”

Initially, when commissioners voted on Moore’s motion for denial, there was 2-2 split, with Commissioner Christina Fitzpatrick not voting.

She asked for greater clarification, and after receiving it, voted against Moore’s motion.

She said she agrees with the project because it will be next to the hospital, and within walking distance.

Next, Mariano moved for a 60-day continuance, which Moore seconded.

Fitzpatrick supported the continuance to give her time to thoroughly study the issue.

That motion passed on a 5-0 vote.

After the vote, Oakley said, “I feel like I’ve been in a workshop I shouldn’t have been in.”

Published January 20, 2021

Planning commissioners recommend land use changes

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has recommended a change to the county’s long-range land use map that would permit a greater intensification of development on a tract in a central area of Pasco County.

It also is recommending changes to policies affecting future development in the Villages of Pasadena Hills, in eastern Pasco County.

The recommendations will be considered by the Pasco County Commission, which has final authority over county land use and zoning matters.

The proposed change in Central Pasco involves increasing the maximum density from three dwellings per acre up to six dwellings per acre, on 77.21 acres on the south side of Tower Road, south of Bexley Village Drive.

The new land use designation would allow a maximum of 325 dwelling units, in a combination of single-family detached homes and townhouses.

The acreage is surrounded by a planned development called Bexley South, to the north; the Suncoast Meadows, to the south; Ballantrae, to the east; and Sapphire Village, to the west.

County planners recommended approval of the request, determining that the proposed plan amendment “is an appropriate location for the change in land use.”

Barbara Wilhite, an attorney representing the applicant, said plans call for 325 single-family dwellings.

No multifamily is proposed, she said, noting the specific plan will come back in a separate request for a rezoning to create a master-planned unit development.

On the issue involving the eastern Pasco development, planning commissioners agreed with a recommendation from the Villages of Pasadena Hills Property Owners Group to reduce the required wetlands buffer from 100 feet to 25 feet.

In supporting that recommendation, planning commissioners rejected a recommendation by  the VOPH policy committee that would have changed the requirement to match the requirement in the rest of the county.

The Planning Commission also rejected a recommendation by the parks, recreation and natural resources department that would have required a more extensive buffer. The county’s planning staff supported the parks and recreation department’s recommendation, but planning commissioners supported the property owners’ recommendation.

Pat Gassaway, representing Heidt Design, told planning commissioners the goal is to take a look at the rules and update them to today’s market.

The current rules, he said, “require preservation of upland habitat without bound,” Gassaway said.

The update also includes myriad of other changes in the VOPH plan, with the goal of the changes to create a more level playing field between regulations required in this planning area and others, and to make the Villages of Pasadena Hills “more market friendly and more competitive,” Gassaway said.

The county has undergone significant changes since the Villages of Pasadena Hills was adopted in 2008, Gassaway said.

Published December 02, 2020

Pasco seeks to hike fees for market-rate apartments

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission is recommending approval of an ordinance that would raise mobility fees charged for market-rate apartments.

The proposed ordinance also would eliminate mobility fees for single-family and multi-family projects that qualify under the county’s definition of affordable housing.

In recommending approval, the planning commission suggested that the higher rates take effect on Jan. 1, 2021. The changes had been proposed to take effect on Aug. 10.

The Pasco County Commission will have the final word on the issue.

Planning commissioners decided to recommend a delay in implementation based on their concerns about the current economy, and after hearing those same worries expressed by the public.

Ed Rogers with Florida Design Consultants, who spoke on behalf of Crown Community Development, urged commissioners to delay implementing higher fees.

“Crown Community Development currently has two projects under active development that are fully entitled and have multi-family components. Chapel Crossings is in the urban service area and Watergrass is in the suburban area.

“In both projects, Crown has contracts pending with market-rate apartment developers who are on the cusp of moving forward,” Rogers said.

He referred to a County Commission workshop, when that board decided to seek higher mobility fees for market-rate apartments and to drop the fees for affordable housing.

“We were living in a different economy back in February,” Rogers said. “In fact, the first item on the workshop agenda that day was the county budget for the next fiscal year, and the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) presented to the board a glowing picture of the economy, which was vibrant at the time.

“The COVID-19 crisis and its significant economic impacts hadn’t yet made its imprint on anybody’s consciousness at that point.

“But, we now live in a different world where more than 30 million Americans have sought unemployment benefits because of the effects of the coronavirus on the economy,” Rogers said.

Raising the fees now could jeopardize Crown’s pending multi-family sales, he said.

He asked that consideration of the proposed fee increases be tabled until the economy is “on a more certain and positive track.”

Attorney Barbara Wilhite, who also spoke on behalf of Crown Community Development, cited similar concerns.

Planning Commission Chairman Charles Grey also questioned the timing of the proposal.

“I think this is probably not a good time to increase fees to anybody that wants to bring a benefit to our county. It’s a fact that would discourage them. We need growth.”

“To me, this is a bad time to do it,” Grey said.

Planning Commissioner Chris Poole agreed, noting that he’s read about the state’s sales tax being decimated in March and that the numbers are expected to be even worse for April.

“Given the uncertainty that we’re facing, I really think that this is an issue that should be tabled and picked back up at a later date,” Poole said.

One representative for the Bay Area Apartments Association spoke in opposition of the higher fees for market-rate apartments, while another representative of that association spoke in favor of eliminating the mobility fees for affordable housing.

Ultimately, planning commissioners voted to recommend that the proposal be found consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan.

The proposed rate changes now go to the Pasco County Commission for consideration.

Published May 27, 2020

Rezoning recommended for Thomas townhomes

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has recommended approval of a rezoning that would allow a 218-unit townhome development, off U.S. 41, about one-half mile north of Ehren Cutoff.

When it was originally proposed, there was significant neighborhood opposition, but no one spoke against the project during a May 21 virtual planning commission, and there was a letter of support for the project submitted by Jeremy Couch, president of the Glen Pine Homeowners Association.

“I understand that this developer has voluntarily agreed to several conditions that will be an improvement for how the property could be developed under the current land use and zoning,” Couch’s letter says.

“Having a townhome development at this location will not only benefit the surrounding property owners and the owners on Lake Thomas, it will benefit our community, as well.

“U.S. 41 needs continued investment to be the place that many desire it to be.

“With new homes, quickly come new retail and restaurant opportunities, that the area so dearly needs.

“We look forward to this project and additional development on U.S. 41,” the letter adds.

A land use change was previously approved by the Pasco County Commission, which cleared the way for consideration of a rezoning on the 45-acre site.

Applicants for the rezoning are N & Z Corporation and Two Sisters Land Trust.

During the course of public hearings on the land use change, Barbara Wilhite, an attorney representing the applicants, noted that the applicants have agreed to numerous conditions that address concerns raised by neighbors.

Among those conditions are height restrictions for the townhomes and buffering requirements. Additionally, no boating access — either motorized or not — will be allowed to Lake Thomas.

Also, access into and out of the project will be off U.S. 41, with a gated emergency-access only entrance to Little Lake Road, according to the conditions.

Planning Commissioner Chris Poole expressed concerns about traffic the development will generate, but ultimately voted in favor of the motion recommending approval of the request to the Pasco County Commission.

The land’s existing zoning allowed 100 single-family homes. The rezoning, if approved by the Pasco County Commission, allows 218 townhomes.

Published May 27, 2020

Commissioners act on rezoning requests

By

Pasco County Commissioners approved a rezoning that will allow a 1.95-acre lot to be split, to allow two single-family homes — despite strenuous objections by neighbors.

The property is on the north side of Country Club Road, about 550 feet west of Old Pasco Road, in Wesley Chapel.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite, representing the applicant, told board members that her client merely wants to allow two dwellings, instead of one, on the property.

Her client has agreed to a deed restriction that would limit the use of the property to two dwellings and also would prohibit access through the property, to Sienna Cove, the development behind it.

Carl Stone, who lives on Country Club Road, asked the board to reject the request, noting that the subdivision’s zoning was set in 1986 by the County Commission.

He also noted that some of the lots didn’t comply with the area’s zoning at the time and were grandfathered in. And, he said a similar request was rejected by the board in 2005.

Other area residents raised concerns about drainage, and the potential precedent the rezoning could set.

Cynthia Lunghofer put it like this: “We want to make sure that there isn’t a precedent being set that could lead to larger parcels being broken up, and potential for townhome or multifamily development.

Neighbors also noted the character of the area, which they described as peaceful and beautiful, and urged commissioners to protect it.

County planners and the Pasco County Planning Commission recommended approval of the request.

And, despite neighbors’ objections, the county board approved the request, pending the filing of the deed restrictions regarding the maximum number of dwellings and prohibiting access through the site.

In other action, commissioners approved:

  • A rezoning to allow 415 single-family detached and/or attached townhome units on approximately 69.18 acres in the Mango Hills master-planned unit development southwest of the State Road 52 and Old Pasco Road intersection. The rezoning was approved on the board’s consent agenda, with no public comment from the audience.
  • A rezoning to allow boat and RV storage on a 4.9-acre site on the east side of Kittyhawk Drive, about 700 feet north of Freefall Avenue, near Zephyrhills. The rezoning was needed to bring the use into zoning compliance. The request was approved on consent, without public comment.

In other action, commissioners directed the county attorney to work with the Pasco County Commission on Human Trafficking to ensure a bathhouse ordinance is in place when the Super Bowl comes to Tampa in Feb. 7, 2021.

The ordinance would ban illegal massage parlors, which serve as fronts for prostitution and human trafficking, said Commissioner Ron Oakley, who raised the issue and asked for board members to approve, making the issue a priority for the county attorney’s office.

Finally, a request for a conditional use permit to allow a residential treatment center in Wesley Chapel has been dropped.

The request would have allowed a facility for up to 30 residents on Pomello Trace in Wesley Chapel.

The applicant, Jordanes Hippolite, wanted to create an elderly care center, on a site at 29436 Pomella Trace, that’s smaller than a half-acre.

Neighbors had objected strenuously and the Pasco County Planning Commission recommended denial.

Neighbors said the facility would threaten their way of life — in a community where residents frequently take walks with their pets, and their children ride bicycles up and down the street.

County planners had recommended approval with a number of conditions, but their recommendation became moot, when the applicant withdrew the request.

Published March 18, 2020

Objections continue to proposed townhomes

By

Residents living near Lake Thomas continue to oppose an increase in the density of development in their Land O’ Lakes community.

A proposed land use change would increase the maximum density from three dwellings per acre to six dwellings per acre, on a 42-acre site, on the west side of U.S. 41 about one-half mile north of Ehren Cutoff.

The Pasco County Commission signaled its support for the increased intensity, in a 4-0 vote to transmit the land use request for a review by state agencies. Commission Chairman Mike Moore was out ill.

Once the state completes its review, the request will come back to the county board for final action.

At that point, commissioners also are expected to consider a rezoning request on the same site that would allow 218 townhomes.

Commissioners supported the transmittal despite passionate objections by area residents.

Eight speakers appeared in opposition to the request.

They cited concerns about setting a dangerous precedent.

Ed Bly, of Little Lake Thomas Road, told commissioners, “today’s vote is not about 218 townhomes in Land O’ Lakes.

“In fact, 99% of Pasco residents have no idea the ramifications of today’s vote and its impact on the older, established communities throughout the county.

“Today’s decision will allow developers to bundle properties together in the old, established communities and then request to double the density of said properties. This will create a trend that will affect all of the older, established communities in Pasco County whether they are in Shady Hills, New Port Richey, Dade City or Zephyrhills,” he said.

“Today, I appeal to think of the older established neighborhoods in your districts and to think of the impact that today’s vote will have on them. Because it is these communities that make Pasco an appealing place to live and they deserve to be protected from this type of rezoning.”

Shirley Schmidt, who lives on Marsh Hawk Drive, urged commissioners to deny the request.

“This proposal should be rejected because it is not consistent with the neighborhood in type, density, surrounding land and stakeholder impact. The Pasco residents must be able to rely on FLU (future land use) maps.”

Joe Seidle, who lives on Lake Thomas Road, noted, “the applicant’s plan is incompatible with the neighbors. But less apparent, the applicant’s plan is incompatible with the rest of our community.

“Please don’t ignore this community’s heritage because some of out-of-towners from Pinellas want to turn a big profit.

“It has taken decades to build this community, but please realize you could be destroying it in just a matter of minutes.

“This place is unique and it deserves some special attention,” he told commissioners.

“Land O’ Lakes is a gem.

“Generations of nature-loving families have raised their kids here. Please resist this constant pressure to build, build, build. It’s times to protect, protect, protect,” Seidle said.

Other speakers raised concerns about traffic hazards and a potential for flooding.

“There’s got to be a left-hand turn out of this development,” said John Lann, of Marsh Hawk Drive. Forcing motorists who want to head north from the project to make a U-turn at Ehren Cutoff is dangerous, he said. “We’re just waiting for the accidents to happen.”

Barbara Wilhite, an attorney representing the applicant, told commissioners that 98 people attended the two neighborhood meetings regarding the development.

As a result of concerns raised by area residents, her client purchased additional acreage to provide direct access onto U.S. 41.

The townhomes will be clustered internally to limit impact from the buildings on adjacent single-family residences. The units will be limited to four-unit townhomes and will be two stories, and there will be substantial buffering.

The conditions for the proposed rezoning also address concerns about boat access to Lake Thomas, she said, noting her client intends to build a passive boardwalk, which will prevent access to Lake Thomas.

Wilhite said the proposed project is consistent with the county’s vision for infill development in areas where there are water, sewer, schools and roadways to serve it.

Commissioner Kathryn Starkey noted that the request is in keeping with the county’s desire to direct growth up the U.S. 41 corridor.

“I see it as a transitional piece, and I am in support. I think the buffering is excellent,” she said.

Commissioner Jack Mariano said he believes the concessions being offered will minimize the impact of the proposed development.

“They’re protecting the lake dramatically,” Mariano said.

Published February 26, 2020

Neighbors battle townhomes near Lake Thomas

By

Residents living near Lake Thomas are fighting a proposed townhome project, on approximately 42 acres, on the west side of U.S. 41, about one-half mile north of Ehren Cutoff, in Land O’ Lakes.

Barbara Wilhite, an attorney representing the applicant, appeared at the Jan. 23 Pasco County Planning Commission hearing, seeking a change to the county’s land use plan to increase the potential density on the site from three dwellings per acre to six dwellings per acre.

Obtaining the land use change is just the first step in the process. A rezoning also would be required before the townhomes could be built.

Wilhite said her client is aiming for a 218-unit townhome project on the property, which represents a density of 4.8 units per acre.

She said meetings have been held with neighbors and, as a result, conditions will be included with the rezoning request to address concerns that have been raised.

Several neighbors voiced objections during the public hearing.

Shirley Schmidt, 21133 Marsh Hawk Drive, Land O’ Lakes, who lives at The Preserve at Lake Thomas, said 300 feet of her property is immediately adjacent to the subject property.

The developer has listened, but she still objects, she said.

“He’s made revisions to address many of our concerns, but there is one overwhelming objection that cannot be mitigated if this project is approved — density, and its impact on traffic.

“The Ridge Road extension project, which is going forward within a few years, will dump a huge flow of traffic onto (U.S.) 41, just north of where this project is located.

“That alone will result in an unbearable increase in the traffic volume. Now, add yet another 400 vehicles from this project, and you’ll be one step closer to total gridlock.

“The traffic light at 41 and Ehren Cutoff is dangerous already. Residents from the proposed townhouse development, who need to go north, will be turning south onto 41 and crossing three lanes of traffic in the space of approximately 200 yards, to do a U-turn. That southbound turn lane creates a blind zone for those headed north and attempting to turn into our subdivision.

“We, in The Preserve at Lake Thomas, lost a resident not less than three months ago to a horrible accident, with this exact scenario.

“Please protect the rights and safety of the existing residents with your ‘No’ vote on this project,” she urged planning commissioners.

Scott Hitt, of 21008 Little Lake Thomas Road, is concerned about impacts of intensifying development.

“You get a bunch of people piled in on top of each other and you’re going to get stuff that starts happening. Right now, we leave our doors unlocked. We have stuff all over the place. Nothing goes missing. It’s kind of a cool place. It’s a gem that’s hidden away in here.

He urged commissioners to reject the request: “It’s not a good fit.”

“We’re not against development. Development is good, just not R-6.”

Planning Commission Chairman Charles Grey asked: “What is good?”

“R-3 (the current land use) is good,” Hitt replied.

Joe Seidle, of 20955 Lake Thomas Road, has lived in the area since 1982.

“We’re not saying we’re anti-growth. We’re saying, ‘It’s too many units,’” Seidle said.

“I haven’t heard one compelling need to change the land use. It’s Res-3, why are we changing it?”

Kathy Eshleman, of 5419 Shell Road, turned in two petitions with signatures from 99 people who couldn’t attend, but are opposed to the request.

She voiced her opposition, and she told planning commissioners she would prefer the development of single-family homes, within the existing density.

Other speakers objected to the intensification of development and voiced concerns about the

potential impacts on traffic, drainage and the quality of Lake Thomas.

Changing Land O’ Lakes’ character?
Ed Bly, of 21117 Lake Thomas Road, asked planning commissioners to consider the precedent that change would set. “This decision will forever change all of Land O’ Lakes, not just the Little Lake Thomas community,” Bly said.

Jane Smith, of 5353 School Road, Land O’ Lakes, is worried about the impacts to the lake, as more people move into the area. “I’m concerned about the runoff, with 218 units.”

Wilhite brought a team of experts to talk about her client’s intentions for the project.

Alexis Crespo, a certified land use planner with Waldrop Engineering, said the client recognizes that a binding project plan and conditions are important, in order for his request to be successful.

Many changes have already been made to the plan, in response to concerns that have been raised, she said.

For instance, the proposed access to the site will be directly from U.S. 41.

Also, the units will be clustered internally to limit impact from the buildings on adjacent single-family residences.

The units also will be limited to four-unit townhomes, two stories in height, she said, and the project will have substantial buffering.

The conditions for the proposed rezoning also address concerns about boat access to Lake Thomas, she said.

“This will have a passive boardwalk for residents, but no motorized or non-motorized boats will be able to access the lake from this project.”

She said the proposed project is consistent with the county’s vision for infill development in areas where there are water, sewer, schools and roadways to serve it.

She also noted that townhomes represents a diversity in type of residential development, and said many beautiful master-planned communities within Pasco County regularly incorporate housing diversity within their communities.

Steve Henry, of Lincks & Associates, said the additional traffic generated from the change compared to what’s currently permitted would have a negligible effect on U.S. 41.

He also noted the developer plans to put a right-turn lane in and a right-turn out lane at the project’s driveway.

Roy Mazur, professional engineer with WRA Engineering, said the project would not be allowed to cause flooding to on-site or off-site property, or to create adverse impacts on water quality.

“Even though a lot of the site will be impervious — there will be concrete, asphalt, buildings — our discharge in the developed condition cannot exceed that the discharge of the existing condition. That’s why the (retention) ponds are there,” Mazur said.

Wilhite also noted that the installation of the boardwalk will prevent access to the lake.

Chief Assistant County Attorney David Goldstein noted that Crespo had presented a site plan that had more detail than is typically included in a master unit plan development.

He asked Wilhite if the zoning request for the master plan unit development will have a detailed plan that will be adopted with the zoning.

Wilhite said her client is willing to document commitments, but hasn’t finalized the plan that will accompany the rezoning request.

“Nobody likes us to say things and then not do them. I get that. That’s not our intent,” Wilhite said.

Planning Commissioner Michael Cox asked Wilhite if her client is committed to proposed conditions contained in the master plan unit development narrative, including no access onto Little Lake Thomas Road, no boat access onto Lake Thomas and buffering requirements.

Wilhite said: “That’s correct.”

“It seems to me that these conditions address a ton of the concerns of residents,” Cox said.

Wilhite also noted: “The boardwalk concept was put in place as a means of enforcing what we say, which is no motorized, or non-motorized access to Lake Thomas.”

It provides a barrier to keep boats out, she explained.

Chairman Grey said,  “We’re here really to talk about the number of units we want to allow on the site. Personally, I think maybe R-6 is a little bit too intense.”

The planning commission voted 4-3 to recommend approval of the requested land use change.

Commissioners Richard Tonello, Peter Hanzel and Chairman Grey voted no.

The issue now goes to the Pasco County Commission, which makes final land use and zoning decisions in the county.

The County Commission is scheduled to consider the request on Feb. 18 at 1:30 p.m., in the board chambers at West Pasco Government Center, 8731 Citizens Drive in New Port Richey.

Published February 05, 2020

Higher density approved near Town of St. Leo

By

The Pasco County Commission has approved a land use change and rezoning to allow increased development at the edge of the Town of St. Leo, despite the Town’s objections.

The approved rezoning allows up to 600 dwellings, 340,000 square feet of commercial and 60,000 square feet of office on 177 acres at the southwest corner of State Road 52 and Prospect Road. Under the approved land use change, up to 300 additional dwellings would be allowed.

A barn now occupies the site.

The Town of St. Leo abuts the northwest portion of the property, and the site is surrounded by the Villages of Pasadena Hills Special Area Plan area.

County planners and the Pasco County Planning Commission recommended approval on the requests for the land use and zoning changes.

But, the Town of St. Leo, represented by attorney Patricia A. Petruff, objected to the rezoning.

She said the requested density is incompatible with St. Leo’s character. She raised concerns about disrupting the view shed that residents in the town now enjoy.

“We had asked for some of those homes to be single-story. We had asked for enhanced landscaping,” Petruff said. “We don’t think the transitions are appropriate or adequate.”

She also said: “You are required to address visual intrusion.”

Planners and representatives for the applicant, however, said the proposed development is an appropriate transition between the Villages of Pasadena Hills and the Town of St. Leo.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite and planning consultant Matt Armstrong represented the applicant.

The new State Road 52 alignment goes through the property, and increased demand for development in the area is expected.

The plan calls for the main access to the property to be off of Prospect Road, south of the intersection of State Road 52, which is an existing signalized intersection.

Wilhite and Armstrong said the project will provide residential and non-residential options for services for students near campus. They also noted that conditions of approval for the project go well beyond the county’s land development code.

“We have brought forward a project that is the right project for this area, and does respect the area,” Wilhite said.

But, Petruff urged commissioners: “We’re respectfully requesting that you table this and direct staff to take another look at those transitions.”

Commissioner Mike Moore observed that aside from the Town’s attorney, no one else spoke in opposition. He made a motion to approve the request.

Commissioner Kathryn Starkey also noted that Saint Leo University is nearby.

“You’ve got a university that has a lot of density right there,” she said, before commissioners voted to approve the rezoning. The comprehensive plan amendment had been previously approved, in a separate vote.

Published November 20, 2019