The Laker/Lutz News

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

Serving Pasco since 1981/Serving Lutz since 1964

Barbara Wilhite

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

Baseball and softball school approved in Wesley Chapel

By

A request to allow a private baseball and softball school in Wesley Chapel has gained approval from the Pasco County Commission.

In granting the request, commissioners overturned a decision made on Feb. 21 by the Pasco County Planning Commission.

Planning commissioners had denied the request , despite a recommendation for approval by county planners, who said the request was consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan, as conditioned.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite appealed the planning commission’s denial, on behalf of her clients, Ryan A. and Elizabeth J. Prior.

The approval allows the school to operate on 5 acres, on a property 320 feet south of the intersection of Hadlock Drive and Elkmont Lane.

The rules governing the appeal hearing, which was held Aug. 6, barred the introduction of new testimony, so Wilhite explained her clients’ request by outlining the conditions contained in the original request.

Among other things, those conditions included:

  • Limiting the number of students on the property on any given day, and at any given time
  • Limiting the hours of operation
  • Prohibiting outdoor speakers and public address systems
  • Keeping balls within the applicants’ property

The main issue during the planning commission hearing dealt with access to the site, Wilhite said.

One proposed condition dealt specifically with improving the road, but the attorney noted, “ultimately, the neighbors objected to anything being done with that road.”

Wilhite also pointed out that during the planning commission hearing, the county staff testified the road was accessible.

Wilhite characterized the planning commission’s action on the request as being confusing.

“It ended up being a 3-2 vote for denial. Interestingly enough, that swing vote was the person who recommended approval and moved approval,” she said.

The motion for approval “didn’t get a second,” she added, “and then that person ended up being the swing vote for denial.”

Wilhite also cited testimony by Denise Hernandez, of the county’s planning staff, who told planning commissioners that another baseball school had been approved on land with the same zoning category about 2 miles away.

“The record was very clear, and your staff was very clear that this was a compatible use,” Wilhite said.

Elizabeth Prior also spoke to commissioners.

“Obviously, myself and my husband are the applicants for this special exception.

“The neighbors that are objecting, we bought the house from them. They had full knowledge of what we wanted to do before we bought the house from them.

“My husband does private clients, it’s one on one, maximum of four at any one time.

“The staff at Pasco County approved the application, with conditions,” she said, adding that two staff experts testified that the road was sufficient.

She told county commissioners that Planning Commission Michael Cox’s motion for denial appeared to be based on “opinion” rather than the record.

Attorney Dave Smolker, of the law firm Smolker Bartlett in Tampa, represented the Dion family, who own property next-door, during the appeal.

“The Planning Commission got it right. This use is simply too intense for this particular location. Sometimes that’s the way it is. It’s a square peg in a round hole,” Smolker said.

He also attempted to introduce information that was not part of the record during the planning commission meeting, which was met by objections from Hernandez.

Smolker told commissioners there was no basis for overturning the planning commission’s decision.

Pasco County Commission Chairman Ron Oakley asked Hernandez to compare the conditions for the current request with the baseball school that was previously granted.

Hernandez said the conditions proposed for the Priors’ application were stricter.

Commissioners Kathryn Starkey and Mike Moore spoke in favor of overturning the planning commission’s denial.

“I’m kind of shocked that this was denied,” Commissioner Kathryn Starkey said.

Commissioner Mike Moore agreed. “I’m going to support overturning this,” he said. “I think this is ridiculous.”

Beyond overturning the planning commission’s decision, board members also called for reducing the restrictions on the baseball and softball school.

For instance, they increased the allowable hours of operation, and they removed a condition relating to road improvements.

Published August 14, 2019

Opponents cite access concerns in Wesley Chapel rezoning

By

Questions are being raised about the safety of entering Wesley Chapel Boulevard from Hay Road, in a rezoning case seeking to allow 35 single-family attached townhomes on Hay Road.

The applicant, Lawrence P. Martinez, represented by Attorney Barbara Wilhite, is seeking to change the zoning on about 6 acres from agricultural use to medium density, multiple family.

The Pasco County Planning Commission heard the request at its May 9 public hearing.

The request involves a parcel on the west side of Hay Road, about 1,800 feet south of Wesley Chapel Boulevard.

The applicant has voluntarily agreed to deed restrictions that would limit the use of the property to single-family attached townhomes, said Denise Hernandez, Pasco County’s zoning administrator.

“This will not be an apartment complex,” Hernandez told planning commissioners, who serves as an advisory body to the Pasco County Commission on zoning and land use plan cases.

The zoning administrator also noted that the Pasco County Commission has approved similar zoning requests, and that county planners have recommended approval.

“The access at this point of time is proposed through Hay Road,” Hernandez said, but she added there’s a possibility that the parcel maybe developed along with the property to the north. If that happens, the primary access would be Wesley Chapel Boulevard, also known as County Road 54.

Neighbors, however, voiced concerns about the safety of using Hay Road as the primary access. Reginal Mesimer, a traffic engineer from St. Petersburg, appeared on behalf of Perry and Synthia Horner, who own property near the proposed rezoning.

The Horners own Hay Road, with some others who have easements to use it, Mesimer said.

“Right now, there are seven homes on Hay Road. One day, the Horners would like to develop their property with 200 units.

“About a year ago, a traffic signal went up at the entrance of Grand Oaks Boulevard, which didn’t line up with Hay Road. Now, there’s no way to provide a left-turn lane to enter Hay Road from County Road 54, and northbound queuing traffic coming out of Hay Road often is blocked by traffic queuing at the traffic signal at (County Road) 54.

“Mr. Horner tells me in the past year there have been two accidents associated with people who actually live on Hay Road, at that intersection, simply because Hay Road is so close to the traffic signal.

“Now, the county has plans to widen County Road 54 (also called Wesley Chapel Boulevard) to six lanes,” Mesimer added.

Mesimer noted that the parcel up for rezoning might be joined with another to the north, which has access to Wesley Chapel Boulevard.

That would be more suitable than trying to flow the traffic from the 35 new units onto Hay Road, Mesimer said.

The Horners have offered to provide land for an access road to allow motorists to drive to the signalized intersection at Grand Oaks Boulevard, which would improve access for everyone using Hay Road, Perry Horner said.

Paul Steele, of 4100 Hay Road in Lutz, urged planning commissioners to reject the rezoning request.

“We see our lives being turned upside down by this whole development, and a devaluation of our property. I’m here in complete protest to the idea,” he said.

Steele said he has lived on his property for 22 years and is raising several children there.

“We moved into that neighborhood for the specific express purpose of having our solitude, our privacy, being able to lead our lives in a certain way — free of heavy traffic, free of potential crime, free of people coming onto property constantly, being able to have our dogs run free, etc., etc., etc.

“This proposed development is going to have a serious negative impact on our lifestyle.

“If the road situation is not changed, it will have even an additional impact on the safety of my family and people coming to visit us on Hay Road.

“There’s been two very serious accidents. It led to one resident actually selling the property, leaving the property.

“It’s already a bad situation with a blind turn. When you turn right off of Hay Road today, traffic is coming 55, 60, 65 miles an hour. Very frequently people are almost rear-ended, just making a right-hand turn because you can’t see the traffic coming,” Steele said.

Wilhite said she’s not sure if her client will use Hay Road to get to Wesley Chapel Boulevard, or will be able to access the road through a property to the north.

David Goldstein, chief assistant county attorney, asked the applicants if there is sufficient right of way to improve Hay Road, if that becomes necessary for access.

Steve Henry, a traffic engineer from Lincks & Associates, representing the applicant, said there is enough right of way for a 20-foot road on Hay Road.

The planning board unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning. The Pasco County Commission has the final say.

Published May 15, 2019

Town of St. Leo opposes increased density near its border

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has recommended approval of changes that would allow increased development on the edge of the Town of St. Leo, despite objections from Town leadership.

Planning commissioners unanimously recommended that a change to the county’s comprehensive land use plan be approved, as well as a change to zoning on 175 acres at the southwest corner of State Road 52 and Prospect Road.

Richard Christmas, mayor of St. Leo, urged planning commissioners to reject the proposed changes — which had received a recommendation of approval from the county’s staff.

Christmas said the increased density is not compatible with St. Leo’s rural character. He also cited concerns about disrupting the view shed the town now enjoys.

Planners and representatives for the applicant, however, said the proposed use of the land would be an appropriate transition between the Villages of Pasadena Hills and the Town of St. Leo.

The proposed land use change would allow a maximum of 900 dwellings, 340,000 square feet of commercial and 60,000 square feet of office.

The proposed master unit planned development zoning, which is being requested on the same acreage, would allow 600 dwellings, 340,000 square feet of commercial and 60,000 square feet of office.

The applicant requested 600 dwellings for both the land use and zoning changes, but the county’s staff recommended 900 dwellings for the land use change, to allow consideration of additional residential development if there’s a demand for it in the future, Barbara Wilhite, an attorney representing the applicant, said at the May 9 public hearing.

The land is currently undeveloped, with the exception of a barn.

County planners said the development provides a transition between the Villages of Pasadena Hills and would step down in intensity, as it gets closer to the town. They also said the plan would provide bicycle/pedestrian connectivity to existing trails and would seek to prevent visual intrusion.

Christmas told the planning commission that the town has been concerned about the proposed density of the plan ever since initial discussions with the applicant in December 2018.

“The Town is OK with the current zoning. The current zoning is compatible with the zoning that’s across the street, State Road 52, which is Lake Jovita, one dwelling unit per gross acre. That’s what the zoning is right now. We’re perfectly fine with that.

“What is being proposed is going beyond what their current rights are to something way more dense,” he said.

In addition to the 900 units contemplated in the land plan change, there would be “the equivalent of 3 ½ Home Depots and 60,000 square feet of office space,” Christmas said.

“The Town (of St. Leo) requests denial of the proposed comprehensive plan change,” the mayor said.

David Goldstein, chief assistant county attorney, asked Christmas if the Town of St. Leo had objected when the Villages of Pasadena Hills was created.

Christmas said there would have objections to density like this on the town border.

But, Goldstein pressed him: “Did you show up at any county public hearing?”

Goldstein continued: “It’s just interesting to me that nobody from the Town was there when we were approving the Villages of Pasadena Hills, including when we were trying to decide whether to include this piece of property. The Town wasn’t there at all.”

This property initially was going to be included in the Villages of Pasadena, and was only dropped at the last minute, Goldstein said.

“The question for you is, if this was so egregious for this to happen, where was the Town the day whether we were deciding to keep it in Pasadena Hills or not? Where were you?” Goldstein said.

But, Christmas told Goldstein that was not the issue before the Planning Commission.

Matt Armstrong, representing the applicant, told planning commissioners: “Density in the right place and in the right way can be a good thing because it does conserve the land, instead of just spreading it (development) out all over the place, without any kind of respect for what’s there.”

The new State Road 52 alignment goes through the property, and there will be an increased demand for development in the area, Armstrong said.

The master plan for the zoning also call for decreasing the density, as it approaches the edge of the Town of St. Leo, Armstrong added.

“We’re residential to residential. That’s compatible.

“When you are up against the Town, it’s only single-family. You can’t have apartments there, you can’t have multifamily there. There can’t be townhouses there,” Armstrong said.

The pedestrian and bicycle connections will make it possible for people to get to where they need to go without having a car, he said.

Attorney Wilhite reminded planning commissioners: “The comp (comprehensive) plan frowns on a Res-1 density because that is the definition of sprawl. It’s inefficient land use pattern.

“Density is not your enemy,” she added. It allows for master drainage plans, streetlights, parks and sidewalks.

“We’re proud of this project. We think it would be a very good project and a good fit,” she said, asking the Planning Commission for its approval.

But, Christmas repeated his concerns.

“To be clear, the Town’s not saying no to development, just that the development next to the Town needs to be compatible with the Town, sensitive to the topography and is not an eyesore,” Christmas said.

Planning commissioners unanimously recommended approval of both the land use and rezoning for the property. The Pasco County Commission will have the final say on the requests.

Published May 15, 2019

Baseball school strikes out on permit

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has denied a special exception request by Ryan A. and Elizabeth J. Prior for a private baseball and softball school in Wesley Chapel.

The request was to allow the private school on a 5-acre property, 320 feet south of the intersection of Hadlock Drive and Elkmont Lane.

It is surrounded by several agricultural uses, which include boarding stables, several equine veterinarians, some other horse stables, and agricultural uses, including single-family dwellings.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite represented the Priors during a planning commission public hearing and Cynthia Spidell, a planner for King Engineering, outlined the proposed use.

The applicants had agreed to a number of conditions.

They agreed to limit the hours of operation; limit to 20 the number of students who could be there on a daily basis, and no more than four at a time; required road maintenance; prohibited glare from lights; and, a number of other conditions.

The county’s planning staff recommended approval of the request.

But, neighbors objected.

Allison Doucette, an attorney representing opponents to the request, said the 15-foot-wide gravel road leading to the site “is really not intended to service any kind of commercial business.”

She said her clients own the horse farm that surrounds the proposed site of the baseball school, and they regularly cross over the easement with their horses.

Neighbor Fred Byrd, of 29439 Hadlock Drive, also objected.

“I don’t want Mr. Prior fixing that road.

“If that road is smooth, we’re going to have people doing 30, 40 miles an hour down that little easement. It’s not safe,” he said.

Besides the neighbors’ horses, Byrd said, “We’ve got a granddaughter. There’s animals out there. There’s dogs and cats.”

Besides the safety issue, dust kicked up by motorists is a problem, too, he said.

“When it’s dry, and the amount of traffic that goes by, if we leave our bedroom window open, our bedroom is covered with dust,” he said.

If the baseball school is approved and there are violations, he doesn’t believe that Code Enforcement would be able to put an end to the problem.

“Code Enforcement basically lived out in this area with all of the problems we had with the prior baseball ranch. They were operating illegally. They were asked to stop. They continued. They were asked to stop. They continued. There were numerous violations.

“Code Enforcement was out there and it didn’t stop them before,” Byrd said.

He also noted that not all of the proposed site is usable. “Half of it is back in a cypress head and part of it is a pond,” he said.

Byrd said he has nothing against baseball.

“I love baseball. I played baseball. I coached baseball.

“There’s a proper place for it. This is an equine community,” Byrd said.

Planning commissioners denied the request, but the applicants have the right to appeal that decision to the Pasco County Commission, if they should choose to do so.

Published March 06, 2019