The Laker/Lutz News

Serving Pasco since 1981/Serving Lutz since 1964

Pasco County Planning Commission

Higher Pasco park impact fees expected to be approved this summer

By

The Pasco County Commission has signaled its intention to increase its park impact fees to $3,450.15 per residential dwelling, whether single-family or multi-family.

That’s a whopping increase from the current rates of $891.82 per single-family unit and $627 per multi-family unit.

Impact fees are charged to new construction to address new demands caused by growth.

County held their first public hearing on the proposed fees on May 23 and are  scheduled to hold a second public hearing on July 11, where they are expected to take a final vote. If adopted, the new fee takes effect on Jan. 1, 2024.

The Land O’ Lakes Recreation Complex, 3032 Collier Parkway in Land O’ Lakes, provides a chance to sit on a bench and relax for a while, watch a ball game, go for a ride on a swing and do all sorts of other activities. Pasco County wants a substantial increase in its park impact fees, which are intended to pay for additional demands caused by growth. (File)

During the May 23 meeting, the board reiterated support it had expressed last September, when it directed its staff to bring the proposed fee schedule back for action.

State law limits impact fee increases to 50%, unless extraordinary circumstances can be demonstrated.

Keith Wiley, the county’s director of parks, recreation and natural resources, said the county clearly qualifies.

The county hasn’t raised its park impact fees since 2002; it has experienced rapid growth in recent years; and it has encountered steeper costs for construction materials due to inflation, Wiley said.

The county’s current facilities cannot keep up with increasing demands, he said.

He also noted the proposed impact fees will be used to support projects outlined in a plan that addresses the county’s park needs through 2045.

“What we’re trying to do is close the gap for level of service for parks throughout the county, through 2045,” Wiley said.

But the higher impact fee is needed, he said. Wiley added: Under existing revenues, it would take 42 years to accomplish the plan.

Stakeholders had asked the county board to phase in the fees over two years, but board members were not interested in that approach.

Wiley thanked the county board for its support.

“Parks are essential, we all know that. Everyone deserves an awesome park. We have a really cool plan, but without finances, you can’t get anything done,” Wiley said.

The county board’s support for the full amount of the proposed impact fees came despite concerns raised by the Pasco County Planning Commission, during its April 20 meeting.

A majority of planning board members said the county had failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances, and thus would be limited to a fee increase of 50%.

Planning board members questioned the timing of the giant increase, noting economic conditions have changed since the county board initially indicated support for the proposed fee last September.

Planning board members also questioned the proposed fee, in light of lesser charges in nearby counties, and they said it didn’t seem fair to place the entire burden of the increased costs on the housing industry.

Published May 31, 2023

Nest Hockey Academy may soon be up to full speed

By

It hasn’t been entirely smooth skating for Nest Hockey Academy, but the facility is moving closer to bringing its vision to fruition.

The Pasco County Planning Commission on May 4 voted unanimously to recommend approval of a request by Russ and Leanne Henderson to rezone a parcel from agricultural zoning district to a master-plan unit development (MPUD) for a hockey academy.

“What we are is a school that also teaches hockey,” Russ Henderson explained to the planning board.

Nest Hockey Academy, at 9175 McKendree Road in Wesley Chapel, was voted unanimously by the Pasco County Planning Commission on May 4 to recommend approval of a request by Russ and Leanne Henderson to rezone a parcel from agricultural zoning district to a master-plan unit development (MPUD) for a hockey academy. (Mike Camunas)

The academy’s building already exists on the site at 9175 McKendree Road, in Wesley Chapel.

It was constructed as part of the Hendersons’ previous request for a special exception to operate the school.

“Everything that you see now that is on our site was part of our submittal,” he said.

But the special exception caps the number of people that can use the facility at one time to 20 people. The building is designed to accommodate hundreds.

The MPUD is being sought to allow the academy to operate at full strength, with up to 150 students. The site also includes 58 parking spaces.

Brad Tippin, the county’s development review manager, said one of the conditions of approval requires the hockey academy to make arrangements for off-site parking, if it needs to, to accommodate parking demand.

Henderson said he believes the 58 spaces on-site will be adequate to meet the need.

“We’re a single sheet (ice rink). We can only play one game at a time. It would always only be one game at a time,” he said.

While there will be occasional events, the focus will be on academics and hockey, he said.

“We are primarily a school. We’re a school first,” Henderson said.

He said the facility is offering something that is sought after in the state. It wants to partner with the Tampa Bay Lightning to develop a girls’ hockey program.

He explained to the planning board that he originally sought the special exception because he had been told it was a faster process than pursuing an MPUD.

Planning board member Jon Moody asked why an MPUD would be necessary, at this point, rather than merely amending the special exception.

Chief Assistant County Attorney David Goldstein said he’d heard there may be opposition and a special exception wouldn’t get the issue before the county board.

Goldstein also noted the larger enrollment could not be met with the current state of McKendree Road. Improvement of that road is required under the proposed conditions for the MPUD.

Still, Moody insisted that the applicant had a right to pursue his request using a shorter, simpler process.

“I don’t personally find it fair to force the applicant into the MPUD process,” Moody said.

But county staffer Tippin told Moody: “I respectfully disagree with that.”

He said county staff believes the MPUD route is a better approach because the project is within the Connected City, which has a different land development code.

During the May 4 planning board meeting, no one spoke against the request.

A group of parents did turn out, in a show of support for the hockey academy.

Two parents spoke in favor of the request.

One father told the planning board: “This program is second to none. We really, really are amazed by the program there.”

A mother added: “We are beyond blessed to have this opportunity.”

She said the parents are looking forward to approval, so they can become actively involved.

“We don’t get to see their progression. We don’t get to volunteer. We don’t get to help,” she said.

Despite the current limitations, she’s impressed with what’s happening there.

“This is a great mission. The Hendersons are a terrific family.”

The request now goes to the Pasco County Commission, which has final jurisdiction on land use and zoning decisions.

Published May 10, 2023

Planning board rejects setback variance on a split vote

By

What’s a few feet, give or take?

In the case of a new house in East Padgett Estates — the difference of a few feet is proving to be a costly mistake.

The house, at 4537 Victoria Road, in Land O’ Lakes, was built with improper setbacks.

The violation of county regulations has sparked neighborhood disputes, led to lengthy public hearings and caused a substantial loss of money for the builder.

The fate of this house in East Padgett Estates remains uncertain. The Pasco County Planning Commission denied a request for a variance that would have allowed it to be occupied. The builder now has the option to appeal the decision to the Pasco County Commission. (Mike Camunas)

The Pasco County Planning Commission voted 4-3 on April 6 to reject SoHo Builder’s request for a variance to the side yard and front yard setback requirements.

If the request had been granted, the county could have issued a certificate of occupancy. Since the variance was denied, the house can’t be occupied.

The applicant now has the option to appeal the planning board’s decision to the Pasco County Commission.

The zoning district where the house is located requires a 10-foot minimum side yard setback on each side and a 25-foot minimum front yard setback.

But the house is 73-feet wide on a 90-foot-wide lot, meaning that it fails to meet the side yard setbacks by a total of 3 feet.

The structure also was built with a 20-foot front yard setback, instead of the required 25 feet.

Patrick Plummer, a representative for the builder, appeared before the planning board twice, seeking a variance.

The board denied it in January and did so again on April 6.

Plummer acknowledged that he erred during the process, but he also pointed out mistakes made by the county.

Plummer said once the setback error was discovered, a new site plan and set of building plans was submitted — for a 70-foot-wide house.

But county officials said there’s no evidence in the county’s records that the new plans were submitted.

Still, the county shares in the blame, according to Scott Carley, chief field inspector for Pasco County’s building construction services.

He said the county uses a system that allows different departments to see the same plans simultaneously.

In this case, zoning flagged the setback issue, but that didn’t prevent electrical, mechanical, plumbing and building from proceeding, Carley said.

“Forty percent is on us,” Carley said, noting this case has been a learning experience for the county.

Plummer asked the planning board to grant the variance.

“This was a bona fide error. We did not intentionally build a larger house. We did not try to circumvent anything,” he said.

But a former president of the area’s homeowner’s association said the buyer should have known the long-established required setbacks for the house.

Planning board member Jaime Girardi said he understands that the builder isn’t the only one at fault, however, he added: “You built something out there that’s drastically different from the rest of the neighborhood.”

Girardi also raised concerns about drainage issues and the insufficient landscaping plan.

County planning staff recommended denial of the request, saying that substantial evidence had not been submitted to justify a variance.

The planning board was divided.

While noting the builder should have spotted the error and stopped the building process to avoid having a completed house that failed to meet requirements, they also acknowledged that errors within the county’s process contributed to the problem.

Planning board member Jon Moody made a motion to support staff in its recommendation for denial and was joined by board members Peter Hanzel and Chris Poole.

Board Chairman Charles Grey and board members Derek Pontlitz and Girardi voted against Moody’s motion.

That left a 3-3 vote, requiring board member Chris Williams to break the tie.

Williams voted in favor of the staff’s recommendation to reject the variance.

In casting that vote, Williams said it was a tough call, but added: “It’s a big mistake. It’s going to be there a long time.”

Williams, planning director of Pasco County Schools, normally only votes on planning requests that involve school district issues. However, he’s also the designated tie-breaker, in the rare events that the planning board is evenly divided.

Published April 26, 2023

New state law pushes for affordable housing

By

A new state law has made it much easier to develop affordable housing across Florida.

Lawmakers have imposed a requirement on local governments that they must authorize multifamily and mixed-use residential as allowable uses in any area zoned for commercial, industrial or mixed-uses — if at least 40% of the residential units meet the definition of affordable housing. Those units must remain affordable for a period of 30 years.

David Goldstein, chief assistant county attorney for Pasco County, explained the new law to members of the Pasco County Planning Commission at their April 6 meeting.

“In this affordable housing bill, the Legislature effectively rezoned a lot of property in Pasco County,” Goldstein told the planning board.

(Mike Camunas)

“The concern that’s been raised by staff and some of our board members is that areas you are zoning today for industrial, commercial, mixed-use – under this bill, there is no guarantee they will be industrial, commercial, mixed-use,” Goldstein said. “Literally, you could be zoning the property C2 (general commercial), under this bill, it could become multifamily, not even necessarily mixed-use multifamily, just plain multi-family.”

The law also provides the county grant the maximum density allowed, which in Pasco County is 32 units per acre, Goldstein said. Plus, the county can’t regulate the height of the buildings in these developments.

The affordable housing defined in the bill is typically referred to as low- or moderate-income housing, or sometimes called workforce housing.

“The caveat that 40% has to be affordable might dissuade some folks from doing this. I don’t know because it depends upon the other incentives that were put into the bill. There are some property tax exemptions. There are some direct incentives they can get from the state,” Goldstein said.

The legislation Goldstein is referring to is Senate Bill 102, which he said is commonly known as the Live Local Act.

The law doesn’t require the planning board to recommend a new multi-family development and the county board doesn’t have to approve it.

“But if they locate on commercial, industrial or mixed-use zoning district, they will never come to you,” Goldstein told the planning board. “It (the law) actually says they have to be administratively approved by staff.”

The county will be able to regulate parking, setbacks, stormwater and other typical development requirements, Goldstein said.

It also can ask applicants seeking new commercial, industrial or mixed-use projects to voluntarily submit a deed restriction that requires them to do those types of projects — rather than substituting a multifamily project, with 40% designated for affordable housing.

“If you are approving a new industrial, commercial or mixed-use zoning, you do have the right to ask the property owner if they’re willing to restrict it themselves,” Goldstein said. “It’s a worthwhile question to ask.

In fact, during a recent Pasco County Commission meeting, the county asked an attorney if her client would be willing to voluntarily agree to a restriction. The client is seeking an industrial designation on land near the Suncoast Parkway.

The attorney said she discuss the request with her client.

While the county may be able to get property owners to voluntarily agree to restrict their property with new requests, Goldstein is concerned about the amount of property around the county that’s already zoned for commercial and industrial use.

“There’s no guarantee that you will get what you zoned under this bill,” he said.

He said he understands there’s a need for affordable housing, but he’s not sure this is the best way to pursue it.

For the past few years, the county has made a concerted effort to identify more sites for job-generating uses.

“One might argue that if you don’t  have a job, you can’t afford housing. It doesn’t matter how affordable it is, and we’ve reserved some of these areas for job production,” Goldstein said.

The county is also concerned about creating jobs that it has been working to identify large tracts that would be suitable for industrial development, with the hope it could bring more jobs to a county where a large percentage of its workforce commutes daily to other counties.

Planning board members voiced concerns about the automatic approvals creating a situation that could create an infrastructure nightmare.

Planning board member Jon Moody said the new law takes a one-size-fits-all approach.

“This may work for Metro Dade, but it may not work for Pasco County,” he said.

Planning board member Chris Williams agreed: “That’s my concern. We’ve done (zoned industrial sites) to try to plan for the future. Now, somebody comes in and approaches in the middle of an industrial zone and says, ‘Hey, I want to put a bunch of apartments up.’”

Published April 19, 2023

Proposed cell tower prompts discussion over competing interests

By

A request for a 195-foot tower at the Plantation Palms Golf Course recently sparked a discussion over how to best protect the interest of area residents.

On one hand, the lease for the cell tower would provide revenue, which could help for the upkeep of the golf course — which under previous ownership had fallen into a state of disrepair, threatening property values throughout the Land O’ Lakes golf course community.

On the other hand, a couple living near the proposed towering pole aren’t exactly enamored by the idea of having that become part of their view-shed on a daily basis. They also worry their property values could suffer because of their proximity to the cell tower.

This cell tower at the Land O’ Lakes Recreation Complex, at 3032 Collier Parkway, cannot accommodate the kind of antenna that T-Mobile wants to install, so a request has been made to add another cell tower on property at nearby Plantation Palms Golf Course. That request has been delayed for another public hearing. (Mike Camunas)

There’s also the argument that the entire community would benefit from improved service for their electronic devices.

Those were some  of the issues discussed by the Pasco County Planning Commission on April 6, during a public hearing on a requested conditional use permit for the proposed tower.

Mattaniah S. Jahn represented the applicants — Ace Cheval, Inc/VB BTS, LLC/T-Mobile South, LLC – 195 — who are seeking permission for a 185-foot monopole along with a 10-foot lightning rod.

The proposed tower would go on a site on the north side of 20 mile Level Road, about 1,550 feet east of Collier Parkway. The subject site consists of a maintenance facility and is designated as a recreation center, on the Plantation Palms master-plan, according to materials in the planning board’s agenda packet.

The pole would be erected within a 3,819-square-foot fenced compound area, on a parcel of approximately 1.89 acres, agenda materials say.

The proposed anchor tenant, T- Mobile, currently has antenna equipment on a flagpole-style cell tower, which is about 1,150 feet southwest of the proposed request, at the Land O’Lakes Recreation Complex, at 3032 Collier Parkway, in Land O’ Lakes.

T-Mobile proposes to terminate its tenancy on that pole because it is unable to physically support the antennas and equipment necessary to meet the area’s traffic needs, agenda materials say.

Verizon Communications, Inc. is the anchor tenant at that site.

After hearing neighbors’ concerns, planning board member Jaime Girardi asked about the possibility of moving the tower farther away, onto the county’s parkland at the rec center.

Jahn said that since there’s already a cell tower on that site, it may be impossible to locate another one there.

Cell tower leases typically contain non-compete clauses, Jahn explained.

Chief Assistant County Attorney David Goldstein said he would need to review the lease to determine if it contains a non-compete clause.

That would be a moot point, though, Goldstein said, if the planning board is interested in helping Plantation Palms preserve its ability to generate money from the cell tower lease — to support its golf course operations.

Girardi said he wanted to know the options before taking a vote.

Planning board member Peter Hanzel said he was ready to support the conditional use request because the golf course needs the revenue and cell phone towers are a necessity to support today’s technology needs.

Planning board member Chris Poole said if it’s possible to get it, he’d like more information about the impacts that cell towers have on property values.

The board voted to continue the issue until its May 4 meeting in Dade City, to allow additional information to be gathered before it takes a vote.

Published April 19, 2023

Pasco approval sets stage for massive development

By

A massive development on 2,900 acres of ranchland in Land O’ Lakes is a step closer to reality.

(Mike Camunas)

The Pasco County Commission on April 4 approved transmitting a request by 4G Ranch PD to the state Department of Economic Opportunity and other state agencies for review.

This is a preliminary step that’s required before the county board can approve a change to the county’s comprehensive plan, and that change is required before new zoning entitlements can be granted.

Plans call for developing approximately 3,800 homes and 300,000 square feet of retail and office uses on the land.

The site is on State Road 52, about 2.25 miles east of U.S. 41. It is currently designated as a rural transition area on the county’s long-range planning map.

The request calls for changing the site’s designation from agricultural and  agricultural-residential to a planned development. 

The subject property is bisected by a Critical Linkage Ecological Corridor, in the name of Connerton to Crossbar. The applicant proposes amending the map to reduce the size of the corridor from about 830 acres to about 595 acres.

The county has no objections to the proposed changes in the eco-corridor because even after the changes, it would meet the intent of providing a connection between ecological conservation areas and supporting necessary habitat, according to materials that were included in the Pasco County Planning Commission’s agenda packet, from when it considered the request.

4G Ranch is owned by the Phillips family.

Published April 12, 2023

Pasco board sends Saddlebrook request to state for review

By

A request to redevelop Saddlebrook Resort has cleared the first step in a lengthy county review process required before any redevelopment can occur.

The Pasco County Commission voted 4-1 to send a request by Miami-based Mast Capital to the state’s Department of Economic Opportunity and other state agencies for review. Commission Chairman Jack Mariano voted no.

The vote came after hours of discussion at the April 4 public hearing, where speakers offered testimony both for and against Mast’s proposed redevelopment of Saddlebrook.

During its prime, Saddlebrook was known internationally for excellence in its golf facilities, with its two Arnold Palmer-designed courses and for its tennis facilities and programs. But the resort, which opened in 1981, has fallen into disrepair and plans for redeveloping it have sparked debate. (File)

Saddlebrook, which opened in 1981, is situated off State Road 54, east of Interstate 75, in Wesley Chapel. It has been the training grounds of professional golf and tennis stars and was once widely known as a world-class resort.

But, by virtually all accounts, the resort has fallen into disrepair over the years and will need a significant infusion of capital to restore it to its glory days.

Pasco County Commissioner Kathryn Starkey said she’s pleased that Mast has stepped forward because other developers have looked at Saddlebrook and couldn’t get the numbers to work.

In broad strokes, Mast’s redevelopment plan has four parts: two areas are within Saddlebrook’s gated community and two are outside, flanking State Road 54.

Area 1 and Area 2 are outside of the gated community.

The plans for Area 1 call for 75,000 square feet of commercial retail/office, 465 multifamily units and 35 townhomes.

The plans for  Area 2 call for 25,000 square feet of commercial retail/office and 120 townhomes.

Area 3 and Area 4 are within the existing resort community.

Plans for Area 3 call for the preservation of the tennis courts and renovation of the clubhouse and resort area.

Plans for Area 4 call for the redesigned golf courses and relocation of the driving range, which currently fronts State Road 54.

Under Mast’s plans, development along State Road 54 would include a mixture of commercial and residential uses in a walkable area featuring neighborhood parks, patio seating, a wide boulevard and other amenities, according to the proposal.

Plans also call for dual left-hand turning lanes leading out of the resort’s main entrance. Plus, an additional right-in/right-out access would serve the new development along State Road 54.

The developer also has committed to extend Vision Road H, to provide another connection into Saddlebrook.

Those speaking in favor of Mast’s request said the company’s investment is needed to save Saddlebrook, and they praised the company for seeking to make Saddlebrook a competitive resort.

They also praised Mast for agreeing to a private deed restriction that guarantees the golf course land will be protected. 

Those speaking against the plan questioned its compatibility with the existing community’s character. They raised concerns about the disruption of the quiet nature of the resort community.

They predicted that increased traffic within the community will pose hazards to people who are walking, biking or using golf carts on the area’s roads.

They also criticized Mast’s plan for lacking a specific timeline for the resort’s renovation.

Some also spoke out against Mast’s plans to replace the two 18-hole golf courses with three nine-hole courses. They said there would be too much distance between holes on the redesigned courses.

They disagreed with Mast’s assessment that a complete overhaul is needed to create a course that will attract today’s golfers.

Despite the disagreements, it appeared that Mast is making progress in building support for its plan.

More speakers stepped forward to support Mast’s plan than had done so at previous public hearings.

The transmittal of Mast’s request for state review is a preliminary step in the process.

Before Mast can proceed with the proposed redevelopment, it needs to secure approval of its requested comprehensive land use change and approval of a companion master-plan unit development (MPUD) zoning.

Each of those requests must go to a public hearing before the Pasco County Planning Commission and then come back to the county board for a final vote.

In voicing support for the transmittal at the April 4 hearing, Pasco County Commissioner Seth Weightman noted he would support the transmittal, but made it clear there are issues that need to be worked out.

Specifically, Weightman said he’s not “not overly enthusiastic” about the proposed multifamily units or the proposed density of Mast’s plan.

Published April 12, 2023

Thousands of homes proposed on 2,900 acres of ranch land

By

A new development is being proposed in Land O’ Lakes that would transform 2,900 acres of ranch land into roughly 3,800 homes and 300,000 square feet of retail and office uses.

The Pasco County Planning Commission has recommended approval of a proposed land use change requested in the name of 4G Ranch PD.

Attorney Clarke Hobby, who represents the applicant, said a separate request also has been filed for a rezoning, which also must be approved for the project to proceed.

Planner Amy Tull detailed the land use request during the planning board’s March 16 public hearing on the request.

A new development is being proposed in Land O’ Lakes that would transform 2,900 acres of ranch land into roughly 3,800 homes and 300,000 square feet of retail on State Road 52, about 2.25 miles east of U.S. 41. (Mike Camunas)

The site is off State Road 52, about 2.25 miles east of U.S. 41, in an area designated as a rural transition area on the county’s long-range planning map.

The request calls for changing the site’s designation from agricultural and  agricultural-residential to a planned development. 

The subject property is bisected by a Critical Linkage Ecological Corridor, in the name of Connerton to Crossbar. The applicant proposes amending the map to reduce the size of the corridor from about 830 acres to about 595 acres.

The county has no objections to the proposed changes in the eco-corridor because even after the changes, it would meet the intent of providing a connection between ecological conservation areas and supporting necessary habitat, according to materials in the planning board’s agenda packet.

Hobby told the planning board that 4G Ranch is owned by the Phillips family, which “does quite a bit for the community and hosts fundraisers out there quite a bit, so many people in the community have been there over the years.”

He said the site is in an area that the county designated years ago as a transition area from higher densities from the west and the south.

The area north of State Road 52 was basically made up of about four ranches that covered the area between Bellamy Brothers Boulevard to Pasco Trails, Hobby said.

But in the past few years, there have been increased development approvals in the nearby area, including the Palmetto Ridge Master-Planned Unit Development (MPUD) and Faircloth MPUD, Hobby said.

“The (State Road) 52 project is now in the (Florida Department of Transportation) DOT work program, and it’s my understanding that it’s to commence in about two or three years, so that’s radically changing the area that’s just been more of a rural-flavored, two-lane road.

“This is going to be a major growth area for the county, both in residential and non-residential, over time,” Hobby said.

The attorney added: “We’ve worked with staff to set the framework for the ultimate negotiations for the eco-corridor and the county’s acquisition of it, over time. That will be addressed concurrently with, or prior to, a second MPUD, which would be in Area 2, on the east side of the conservation area that you see on the map, which is the eco-corridor.

“What you are going to see in a couple of months — we only have one MPUD proposed at this time on Area 1, and that will be following this, like I said, by a couple of months.

“The family’s intention is to hold Area 2, where they have their large family compound, where the fundraisers are typically held, for an indefinite amount of time. We’re thinking it could be some period of time before that is dealt with.

“The subarea policies deal with the (elementary) school (site) and infrastructure issues that are important.

“We have a condition that requires the dedication of a school (site), once we have approval of above 1,500 units, on Area 2,” Hobby said.

“We have met with the Pasco Trails HOA several times and we’ve made some changes to our concept plan, which will find its way into the MPUD conditions — do a few things design-wise to make it more palatable for them. Feel like we have a good relationship with those folks, and we plan on continuing to be good neighbors,” Hobby said.

During the public comment portion of the planning board’s hearing, one couple, who lives next to the proposed land use change, voiced concerns about losing the oak and pine trees that currently provide a buffer between their property and the site. They would prefer the trees remain.

But Shawn Roark, president of Pasco Trails Homeowners Association, said the majority of people within the HOA would prefer ponds be used to buffer the property.

“We’ve met multiple times with 4G Ranch and they’ve been very gracious and open to our input. They’ve made changes,” Roark said, referring to a planned MPUD rezoning, which is a separate request.

Roark said using the ponds as buffers will help direct the drainage flow to the north, where it needs to go. He also thinks that approach will help preserve the area’s rural flavor.

Another speaker at the meeting represented a couple who has 10 acres nearby.

The speaker said the couple’s primary concern relates to what kind of buffering will be used and whether the new development will have any negative impacts on existing residents.

Published March 29, 2023

Planning is ‘a balancing act,’ planning board chairman says

By

When the Pasco County Planning Commission considers a request, it needs to look at the issue from every side, board chairman Charles Grey said during a recent meeting.

“It’s a balancing act. You’ve got to balance the rights of a property owner with the rights and the expectations of the current citizens in the area. So, what we try to do is push and pull until we feel we have a reasonable balance in that area. It’s never going to be perfect,” Grey said, during a March 2 public hearing.

His remarks came during consideration of a request to allow a maximum of 162 townhomes, on a 40-acre site off Caroline Drive, in Wesley Chapel.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite, representing the applicant, said the request calls for 162 on land is designated on the long-range plan for up to 194 units.

The previous zoning allowed single-family detached residences; this one calls for townhomes, which essentially are attached residences, Wilhite said.

The site is within the county’s urban service area and the county has identified future “vision” roads in the area.

Vision roads are roads that are not yet part of any capital improvement plan, but are envisioned as being necessary to serve future growth.

Wilhite said there are two significant vision roads in the area, including a vision road that would extend Bruce B. Downs Boulevard through Wiregrass, Saddlebrook and north to Overpass Road.

The other vision road is an extension of Wells Road, Wilhite said.

“Because of these major roads, there will be higher density and intensity, as you approach these intersections,” Wilhite said.

She also noted there are some advantages of townhome development over detached single-family development.

“One of the benefits of the townhomes is that you have a central amenity,” she said. “By contrast, at individual residences, pools can be within 5 feet of the property line.”

Wilhite also noted: “Townhomes are commonly maintained. If you live in a townhome, you pay your HOA to maintain your roof, your paint, your shrubs, your grass and the landscaping in the common areas. In a single-family subdivision, you pay your HOA to chase your neighbor to try to get them to comply.”

She showed the planning board a visual of the proposed site plan.

“You see a lot of ponds on here because of the density. We have property. We’re able to cluster those townhomes and create a very nice living environment,” Wilhite said.

The attorney acknowledged that neighbors are concerned about additional traffic that will traveling down Caroline Drive, en route to State Road 54.

Several of those neighbors spoke during the public comment portion of the hearing, expressing concerns about traffic.

Others spoke about the incompatibility of a townhome community next to single-family homes, and others mentioned the potential loss of area wildlife and a concern about a potential increase in crime resulting from more people moving into the area.

The developer has agreed to pave Caroline Drive to Pasco County standards.

He also has agreed to install a sidewalk on one side of Caroline Drive.

That concession came after board chairman Grey asked if a sidewalk would be added on Caroline Drive, to address safety concerns.

“In order for me to feel comfortable about approving a new development, it needs to bring something to the existing area they don’t have. It can’t just take,” Grey said.

“If it doesn’t enhance the adjoining areas in some significant way, then why put it there? It’s not ready for it,” Grey said. “We’ve got to look out for our citizens.”

The developer also will do any necessary access management improvements that are required at State Road 54 and Caroline Drive.

Plus, there will be an emergency-access only gate at Tucker Road, but that designation could change in the future if Tucker Road is paved and the county’s future road network is established.

The developer also has agreed to construct a six-foot fence around the project, which will be gated.

The county’s planning staff recommended approval of the request and the planning board concurred, with the exception of Planning Commissioner Peter Hanzel, who voted no.

Hanzel said he would prefer the site be developed with larger, single-family homes.

Published March 22, 2023

Proposal aims to create Odessa Town Centre plan

By

Pasco County is engaging in a process aimed at providing a cohesive approach to future development on about 81.5 acres at the southwest corner of Gunn Highway and County Road 54.

County planners began working about two years ago with a consultant to create what is now being called Odessa Town Centre.

The site is within Pasco County Commissioner Kathryn Starkey’s district and she advocated for a  county-initiated land use change to try to prevent piecemeal development of the property.

The county board had been set to vote on transmitting the proposed plan to state agencies for review, during its Feb. 21 meeting. That action was delayed because the plan area had been  expanded, requiring additional public notice before the board could consider the request.

The county board is now set to vote on the issue at its March 21 meeting, during its 1:30 p.m. session at the government center at 8731 Citizens Drive, in New Port Richey.

At the county board’s Feb. 21 meeting, Starkey provided background to her colleagues: “This is Gunn (Highway) and (State Road) 54, where the old flea market used to be.

“We were very worried that it was going to be piecemealed … People were swirling all around it, wanting to buy it.

“They all want to put (in) multi-family, and, there’s great job potential there, if we do it right,” Starkey said.

The Pasco County Planning Commission has already heard the issue and recommended unanimously to transmit the request for state review.

The proposed plan includes areas designated for light industrial, business park, mixed-use office and retail, and high-density residential.

Transmittal of the plan for state review is a preliminary step before it can come back before the county board for a final vote.

At the planning board’s meeting, Planning Commissioner Jon Moody said he wanted to make sure that none of the current property owners — regardless of how much land they own  — get left behind.

David Goldstein, chief assistant county attorney, said a condition could be included in the comprehensive plan’s sub-area policies, to ensure that property owners within the area would be able to pursue a master-plan development, regardless of property size.

The plan doesn’t preclude current property owners from continuing their current use, or pursuing another one that’s within their current zoning.

If they wish to rezone, however, they would be subject to the rules of the new Odessa Town Centre plan.

Nectarios Pittos said a primary aim of the Odessa Town Centre plan is to designate land that would be appropriate for job-generating uses.

Attorney Joel Tew, who represents a mixed-use developer from Miami, said his client is currently seeking an MPUD to develop about 20 acres on the western portion of the Odessa Town Centre area.

His client embraces the need for a master plan for the area, Tew said.

“We think it’s a great vision. It’s a great plan.

Gerald Speer, who lives on Blissfield Road, said he’s one of the “small guys” within the proposed Odessa Town Centre.

“I have one-third acre. I have the smallest amount of property of the 27 people that’s in this. I am the one who’s going to suffer badly,” Speer said.

If Blissfield is widened, as shown on the conceptual plan, Speer said when he steps out his front door, he’ll be stepping into the street.

“My house is 1,800 square feet and there’s nowhere else in this town where I could move that I would like better than where I am now. Where I’m at now, I’ve got hospitals, I’ve got grocery stores, I’ve got everything.

“I’m almost 70 years old, and I’m kind of stuck, because it’s going to be very hard for me to move.”

Speer said he’s already dealt with dirt being kicked up into his house from nearby construction activity and that he’s seen traffic increase substantially on Old Gunn Highway.

“The road is terribly overburdened, and wait until they build the Lowe’s (which is going on the old flea market site). It’s going to be even worse,” he said.

“What have I got to look forward to? Where am I going to find an 1,800-square-foot house?

“I’m going to lose this. I know I’m going to lose this,” he said.

Virginia Loe has property on Interlaken Road, sought assurances that she’ll be able to continue with her plan to have a log cabin on her land.

Planning Commission Chairman Charles Grey said the proposed land use change would not force her to change her plans.

“You can still use the property,” Grey said. “You’re not compelled to do a commercial or industrial use there. You can do what you had planned.”

Moody responded to Speer’s comments.

“I understand. I’ve been here since I was 6 years old,” Moody said. “The corner of Gunn (Highway) and  Highway 54 (State Road 54) — it was cows. But that’s not what it is today.

“I’ve been here 50-plus years, too.

“State Road) 54 is not what (State Road) 54 was when I was a child.

“There’s nothing we’re going to do to stop this, and I’d rather have a good plan and a cohesive plan rather than for us to repeat some of the sins of the past that happened along U.S. 19, along the west side of the county.

“In this one, I’ve got to give credit where credit is due, this is some good planning,” Moody said.

Published March 08, 2023