The Laker/Lutz News

Serving Pasco since 1981/Serving Lutz since 1964

Pasco County Planning Commission

Changes recommended in Villages of Pasadena Hills

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission favors changes to the county’s land use plan, to allow greater flexibility within two villages in the Villages of Pasadena Hills (VOPH).

The planning board voted unanimously at its July 7 meeting to recommend approval of the request to the Pasco County Commission, which has final jurisdiction.

Initially, the request had been on the board’s consent agenda, meaning it would be approved as part of a bundle of items without discussion, unless someone objected or had questions.

Planning Commissioner Jonathan Moody asked for the item to be pulled so he could learn more about the request.

The Villages of Pasadena Hills is a special planning area, with its own financial plan.

The district was formed with the aim of creating an orderly way to develop a large area of land in East Pasco, through the creation of a series of specific types of villages.

The proposed changes would apply to Village L and Village M, which are east of Curley Road and north of the Zephyrhills Bypass, according to a memo in the planning board’s agenda packet.

The purpose of the amendment is to provide greater flexibility in the land use mix within each of the villages, and allow more opportunity for more compact areas of development in and around village centers, the memo says. The amendment is necessary to achieve the proposed density for Village L and Village M that is assumed in VOPH’s financial plan.

The current Type 3 Village requirements also would effectively prohibit the build-out of the two villages to their planned density and frustrate the ability to design the villages in accordance to the land use vision plan, the memo adds.

Attorney Clarke Hobby, representing the applicant, told the planning board: “The only reason this plan amendment is before you is when we started working on this project, we realized that we think there was an error in the village typology,” he said.

A Type 3 Village requires a neighborhood edge, which is not more than two units per on 70% of the entire village, Hobby said.

That limitation would result in being able to achieve roughly 40% less than the village entitlements, which amounts to about 1,800 units, Hobby said.

“That’s about a $20 million hit on the VOPH financial plan,” the attorney estimated.

The change that’s being requested would “keep the same entitlements, but allow us to have a more neighborhood general, neighborhood core area as opposed to just a sprawling area of not more than two units per acre, which is not efficient,” Hobby said.

There was no other public comment at the meeting.

The land use change is the first part of the process. The land also would need to be rezoned before it could be developed. A rezoning request is being pursued for the designation of a  master-planned unit development.

Published August 03, 2022

Project at I-75 and State Road 52 moves closer to approval

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has recommended approval of a rezoning request to clear the way for a project known as Pasco Town Center, on roughly 1,000 acres at the southeast quadrant of Interstate 75 and State Road 52.

Pasco County will seek to build a project known as Pasco Town Center at the southeast quadrant of Interstate 75 and State Road 52. (MIKE CAMUNAS)

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

This won’t be the first time the county board considers the project.

It approved an economic incentive deal on June 7, with Columnar Holders, relating to the proposed project, which includes 4 million square feet of industrial space; 725,000 square feet of office space; 3,500 housing units; 400,000 square feet of retail and 300 hotel rooms.

The agreement terms provide a $55.8 million package for Columnar, funded mostly through property tax rebates, as specific milestones are met.

The development company also will install key roads and utility connections beyond the Pasco Town Center Property – providing $70.1 million in public infrastructure, with no direct cost to taxpayers, David Engel, the county’s director of the office of economic growth, said at the June 7 county board meeting.

Pasco Town Center is within the Employment Center area of Connected City.

Joel Tew, attorney for the applicant, described the project to the planning board at its July 21 meeting.

“We’re talking about thousands and thousands of jobs,” he said.

“We must use at least 55% of the land — in this case, we’re talking over 1,000 acres of land, so we’re talking about over 500 acres of land must be allocated and used for corporate business park, targeted business or industrial use,” Tew said.

“We then must use at least 20% for residential uses, but they can’t be single-family detached. So, everything has to be multifamily or townhomes to support the employment center.

“Then, finally, we have to use at least 5% for support commercial uses for the employment center,” he said.

Planning Commissioner Chris Williams, who also is the director of planning for Pasco County Schools, noted that the residential entitlements are double what had been previously proposed.

That raises the issue of the potential need of a school site within the project site, Williams said.

Tew responded: “For the record, we understand that concern.”

He also noted that there’s still a significant amount of land that has not yet been committed to a particular use, so he is confident that a suitable site could be identified.

At the planning board’s meeting, Engel explained the significance of the Pasco Town Center project.

“It’s vitally important for our economic future because it is the heart of our economic development area, on I-75 and (State Road) 52, employment node,” he said.

It will provide infrastructure — the public spine roads and the master utility lines—for the employment center area, as well as to areas to the east, he said.

The Office of Economic Growth wanted to ensure the elements of the economic development agreement were carried through to the master-planned unit development (MPUD) level, so it has worked closely with the county’s planning department to ensure that happened, he said.

County planners recommended approval of the request.

Neighbors seek to protect their tranquility
Carol Roth, who lives on McKendree Road, appeared before the planning board, along with her daughter and granddaughter. All three women raised concerns about the impacts the sizable project will have on their way of life.

“When we came into this area, it was beautiful and serene,” Roth said.

“I feel it is the obligation of Pasco County government to protect me and my environment and my land, as you allow for growth for business and other people. I’ve lived there over 50 years, I built that home and I’ve enjoyed what I have.

“I’ve enjoyed its inherent beauty. I don’t know if people are familiar with rural Pasco, but it’s a distinct beauty,” she said.

She also noted that her property has a variance for an air strip and wanted assurances that wouldn’t be affected, if future plans call for a new school nearby.

Roth said she’s not against development, she’s against the impacts that come with this type of development.

“What happens to the little people who own 20 acres right across the street?” she said.

Her granddaughter noted that the family built their home “with their own sweat and blood.”

She expressed concerns about impacts on wildlife in an area where gators walk across their property, dozens of turkeys hang out there, and there’s sandhill cranes and other creatures.

Safety is an issue, too, she said.

Roth’s daughter noted that all of the development will create light pollution, resulting in a loss of access to the night sky, and the sense of stillness and awe they currently enjoy.

Brad Tippin, the county’s development manager, said the county doesn’t anticipate any conflicts with the landing field from future development. He also noted that plans call for realigning McKendree Road, which would push traffic further away from the family’s home.

Tew said that whenever development occurs, it will be required to meet buffering, setback and landscaping requirements.

Planning Commissioner Jon Moody observed: “We can’t stop Tampa from extending northward. I don’t think there’s anything we can do to stop that kind of growth. The population continues to grow, the people up North keep coming. And, from the looks of things, it looks like it’s going to keep coming.”

Moody said he understands the family’s concerns, noting he won’t pay for streetlights in his neighborhood because he enjoys the night sky, too.

“But I can’t guarantee that the next 100-acre tract over or the one after that is not going to get built on; I don’t own it,” he said.

He also noted this project is “going to bring a lot of jobs, probably desperately needed  jobs.”

Planning Commissioner Jaime Girardi agreed: “Growth is coming. It’s inevitable.”

At least now, both Girardi and Moody said, the county is planning for growth.

Planning Commissioner Williams added: “My family has been here for five generations, here in Pasco County.”

He, too, enjoys the rural nature of where he lives, Williams said.

But he added: “I can’t dictate what my neighbor decides they want to do with their property.”

Planning board chairman Charles Grey added: “We’re aware, keenly aware, of growth and how it affects areas that we once thought were going to be that way forever.”

This project has been thought out and will have considerable benefit, Grey said.

“There’s going to be a downside as far as you’re concerned because of the growth, but the upside is, at some stage, you may want to sell that property, and when you do, it’s going to be worth a lot more money, because of it,” Grey said.

Published July 27, 2022

Let Us Do Good Village gets OK for amenity center

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has granted approval of a special exception to the county code to clear the way for an amenity center with the Let Us Do Good Village, a community being built by The Stephen Siller Tunnel to Towers Foundation.

The requested center is planned for a site that’s slightly less than 5 acres on the south side of Parkway Boulevard, about a half-mile east of Ehren Cutoff.

Plans for the new subdivision call for 96 single-family detached homes.

The amenity center is planned for construction at the main entrance to Let Us Do Good Village, at the intersection of Parkway Boulevard and Do Good Way, according to information the planning board’s agenda packet.

In addition to the amenity center, two neighborhood parks are proposed to be located in the western section of the site, adjacent to the Panther Run subdivision.

The planning board approved the request as part of its consent agenda. The consent agenda contains a number of agenda items that are voted on, in a single motion, unless someone pulls an item for discussion.

There was no public comment on the request.

While the planning board has the authority to grant special exceptions, the Pasco County Commission can revoke them.

Published June 20, 2022

Request calls for new 107-home subdivision

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has recommended approval of a request to allow a maximum of 107 homes on a 43.5-acre site in Land O’ Lakes.

The property is on the north side of Dogpatch Lane, about 390 feet west of Joy Drive, and abutting Joy Drive, about  690 feet north of Dogpatch Drive.

The application seeks to change the zoning from agricultural and agricultural-residential designations to a master-planned unit development.

County planners found the request consistent with the county’s long-range plan and land development code, and recommended approval.

The planning board voted to recommend approval to the Pasco County Commission, which has final jurisdiction over county land use and zoning issues.

The planning board’s action came despite objections from area residents who raised concerns about potential impacts on wildlife and the prospect for additional traffic on Lake Patience Road.

Cathryn Baxter Polonitza told the planning board that she’s worried about negative impacts on the area’s wild creatures.

“I know my neighbors see gopher tortoises pretty frequently. They are an endangered species,” she said.

The proposed development also appears to be closing off the wetlands, she said.

Plus, “our schools are completely overpacked, right now. We have portables.

“We have issues with traffic. I’ve seen myself, fire trucks not be able to go where they need to go because of the traffic we have on Lake Patience (Road),” Polonitza said.

She told the planning board that many of her neighbors couldn’t attend the meeting because it was being held during the middle of the day, when people are working.

Ron Rubrecht, another area resident, said he’s concerned about the wetlands and also the increased traffic.

“You’re going to put 200 more cars in the neighborhood,” he said.

There’s already backups as people pick up and drop off their children at Oakstead Elementary, which is on Lake Patience Road, Rubrecht said.

“Lake Patience is going to have to be a four-lane road with turn lanes, to accommodate the school,” he said.

Debbie Moore, who also lives nearby, told the planning board: “We’re just getting pounded and pounded and slammed in, as tight as you can possibly get.”

Like the others, she complained about adding traffic to Lake Patience Road.

“This is a very, very horrible road,” she said.

Barbara Heck, another area resident agreed with the traffic concerns: “You cannot get through Lake Patience at school time.”

Planning Commissioner Jonathan Moody asked Polonitza who had told her that gopher tortoises are an endangered species. They’re not an endangered species, he said, but are a protected species.

That means a survey will be done and the gopher tortoises will be removed and relocated, Moody said.

The planning board member said the same process likely was used to make way for other development that’s already occurred in the area.

Attorney Barbara Wilhite, representing the applicants, told the planning board that her client will comply with gopher tortoise requirements.

She also noted that the proposed density of the development is in keeping with the county’s long-range plan.

The proposed subdivision, which will consist of single-family detached homes, will be served by county water and sewer, the attorney added.

The type of development is what the county’s plan envisions, Wilhite said.

Published June 20, 2022

Planning board delays vote on new flood prevention regulations

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has delayed consideration of new flood prevention regulations until July 21, to make sure that details are worked out before it votes on the issue.

The planning board provides recommendations to the Pasco County Commission, which has final jurisdiction on land use and zoning issues.

Before sending the issue to the county board, planning board members said they want to make sure that the changes being recommended do not have unanticipated impacts.

Jonathan Moody, who was sworn in as new planning commissioner on July 7, said he’s been working on the issue, alongside Barbara Wilhite, a private attorney, who often appears before the planning board to represent clients on land use and zoning issues.

Moody, who was named to the planning board as Pasco County Commissioner Jack Mariano’s appointee, is a civil engineering consultant who specializes in land planning, permitting and drainage design.

He asked the planning board and county staff if the issue could be delayed until the planning board’s July 21 meeting, to try to work out the details before voting.

Esther Oluyemi, an official with the county’s building department, represented the county on the issue. She said she thought it would be possible to address the loose ends by the July 21 meeting

Moody’s request for the delay came after he raised questions on some issues for which there were no immediately available answers.

Moody and Wilhite pointed out that county staff has been responsive, diligent and collaborative in working on the issue.

But more clarity is needed, Moody said.

Wilhite said the goal is “to make sure there is not unintended consequences.”

Changes are needed to the county’s land development code to bring the county’s flood damage prevention regulations in line with the model ordinance approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and to coordinate with Chapter 18, buildings and building regulations of the Pasco County Code, according to Oluyemi.

The county participates in the National Flood Insurance Program and is currently a 6 on the Community Rating System, qualifying county residents for a 20% discount on flood insurance policy rates.

In 2021, the county had 19,015 policies and the discount represented $3.1 million in savings, Oluyemi said.

Reduce congestion: Make better roadway connections

By

It’s no secret that Pasco County motorists frequently are frustrated by traffic backups, as they make their way to get wherever they need to go, throughout the day.

But the county already has a tool aimed at relieving congestion on its major roads, it simply isn’t using it as frequently as it should, according to David Goldstein, chief assistant county attorney.

Goldstein cited a portion of the county’s land development code that requires connections to be made between developments.

Those interconnections would give motorists additional ways to get around, without routinely being forced onto main roads to reach their destination.

The attorney’s remarks came during a June 16 discussion between members of the Pasco County Planning Commission and a consultant, regarding issues that need to be part of the county’s update of its comprehensive plan.

“To a large extent, the county has been good about trying to incentivize, encourage compact walkable communities,” Goldstein told Steve Schukraft, a planner with HDR Inc., consultants working with the county on its Pasco 2050 update.

“You’ll see some examples throughout the community,” Goldstein said, pointing to Starkey Ranch and Bexley as communities designed to be walkable and compact.

But, Goldstein said: “What happens is, you get a great community — like a Starkey Ranch or Bexley that has all of these compact, walkable, mixed-use requirements, for a sense of place — but then one development over is a gated subdivision, with no interconnectivity whatsoever. It doesn’t interconnect with the one that is connected.

“And, I’ll just be honest with you, we’re sometimes our own worst enemy. We’ll approve MPUDs (master-planned unit developments), flat-out gated subdivisions, with no interconnectivity,” Goldstein added.

He continued: “I review almost every MPUD that comes through the county. I’d say 80(%) to 90% of them have some part of the project they don’t want to interconnect.

“We have a code section that says, ‘You shall interconnect.’ But we are frequently granting alternative standards or variances, so people don’t have to do that.

“In many cases, it’s just because the developer says, ‘I don’t want to.’ Or, ‘I want to have a gated subdivision. I don’t want to have any interconnectivity.’

“With all due respect to staff, staff says, ‘OK, you don’t have to.

“Staff recommends approval of it. Planning Commission approves it. The board approves it. And everybody just acts like it’s not a problem.

“My point is, if we’re serious that this is what we want — compact, walkable communities with a street network that’s connected and plenty of alternate modes, at some point we just need to step up and say, ‘This is what you have to do.’”

There are some communities that have been planned with ways for people to get around from place to place, using golf carts, scooters, bicycles or walking.

“But in terms of local connections, local road interconnects? In my opinion, we’re doing a horrible job with it,” Goldstein said.

“I’m not blaming anyone in particular, we’re all rubber-stamping this,” Goldstein said.

“It’s sort of a death by a thousand cuts. Nobody realizes that we’re doing it, but I’m just telling you, we are,” he said.

Published July 06, 2022

Themes emerge, as Pasco updates plan

By

As Pasco County works to update its comprehensive plans, themes have been emerging through listening sessions, according to a consultant working with the county on the Pasco 2050 update.

Pasco residents primarily identify as being residents within a specific community, said Steve Schukraft, a planner with HDR Inc., the consultants working on the county’s plan update.

There’s “a very diverse set of perspectives and a diverse set of ideas about what their life is like in their community and how they see the county, overall,” he said.

Schukraft shared some of the key issues that have emerged during the listening sessions with members of the Pasco County Planning Commission, during a June 16 workshop.

The State Road 52 and Interstate 75 interchange is expected to become far busier, as large industrial projects that are planned near the interchange are developed. Pasco County has approved recent incentive packages that are expected to yield more than 8,000 jobs in the area. Planning for industrial development has been identified as one of the county’s key needs, during Pasco County Commission discussions. (Mike Camunas)

He also shared information gleaned from reviews of previous engagement efforts by the county, and from a review of the county’s planning practices and documents.

Plus, he opened the discussion up to the planning board’s thoughts on issues they think must be addressed in the Pasco 2050 plan.

One topic that’s been raised repeatedly during the listening sessions is a concern about the impacts from rapid growth on community character and compatibility, Schukraft said.

He also told the planning board: “An observation that we would make is that there’s not a real clear sense among the general public about what the comprehensive plan calls for. So, they’ll see development on the side of the road that is perfectly in line with what the comp plan calls for and what zoning allows — they’re just upset because it represents a change in their day-to-day life,” he said.

“People talked a lot about their concern when they see a site cleared for development, when they see corridors getting more development and getting more dense over time,” he said.

“People don’t know where the line is drawn now between the more suburban future land use categories and the rural categories,” he noted.

Opinions about life in Pasco vary widely, depending on where people live, he added.

“We heard from people in the new large-scale master-planned communities (who said) that they had the best quality of life of anyone in the country. We had some people in some other communities who felt they were kind of falling behind, that they didn’t have the advantages of other folks in the county —  they didn’t have the same quality of facilities, same accessibility. So, there was a big divergence in perspectives.”

One big theme that came up centered on “protecting and conserving rural communities and landscapes.

“We heard that often. We heard that throughout the county,” Schukraft said.

The consultant said he thinks for many, it’s an issue of visual impact.

His sense of their sentiment was this: “I like my open views. I like the rolling hills in Northeast Pasco and I don’t want those developed.”

Planning board member Chris Williams told Schukraft: “As somebody who lives in the Dade City area and lives on a rolling hill and has an open view, those (statements) ring true to me.”

But David Goldstein, chief assistant county attorney, noted: “The people who are saying, we need to protect our rural area, where are they suggesting that growth go? You can’t say, ‘We want no growth.’”

During listening sessions for the upcoming update of Pasco County’s comprehensive plan, the need for preserving rural areas was one of the common themes that emerged. Balancing that desire with the need to accommodate growth could surface as one of the major debates, in the process to create the Pasco 2050 plan.

Work on comprehensive plan update is in early stages
Schukraft told the planning board, at this point in the process, he was merely presenting what was heard in the listening sessions and what has been gleaned from reviewing previous county engagement efforts,

The research being done also includes a look at the county’s demographics and socioeconomics; land use development conditions; mobility; a review of existing planning and policy framework; a market analysis to look at where the market opportunities are; strengths and weakness in Pasco’s market position; and, some planning best practices.

Charles Grey, the planning board’s chairman raised an issue that bothers him.

“It really turns me off when I drive by a nice wooded piece of property and then the next day I drive by and it’s leveled, there’s not a tree on the site.

“I’ve seen them tear out 500-year-old oak trees to put in a car wash. That doesn’t make sense to me,” Grey said.

He’d also like to see what can be done to encourage redevelopment.

“There’s plenty of areas that could be redeveloped. From a practical point of view, how do you do it?” Grey asked.

Schukraft noted the negative impacts caused by congestion.

“One of the direct impacts of development is traffic and most of the county is developed in auto-oriented fashion, so to get a gallon of milk, or to get your kid to school or to get to work, you’re driving.

“So, you’re in a car and you experience the county in a car to meet most of your daily and weekly needs.

“We need to look really carefully about how we accommodate those additional trips on the network with already constrained capacity,” Schukraft said.

Planning board member Don Anderson addressed the shortage of affordable housing.

He told Schukraft: “There’s already tenants being displaced because people are moving into the area. People who have lived here, were raised here, are actually being displaced because of the increase in rents.”

Schukraft responded: “People are bringing fat checkbooks into the region and pricing folks out.”

“And then just the movement from folks getting priced out of Hillsborough and Pinellas, coming up to Pasco to try to find cheap housing is putting pressure on the market, too. Some of it has to do with raw supply. The market needs to probably be producing twice the amount of houses per week or month, or units per week or month to meet that demand. And, that ramp-up hasn’t happened yet.”

If you would like to know more about Pasco County’s comprehensive plan update efforts, visit Pasco2050.com.

Published July 06, 2022

Planning board delays request, so neighbors can iron out issues

By

The Pasco County Planning Commission has delayed a request in the Central Pasco Employment Village, to give neighbors a chance to discuss proposed conditions of approval.

The main sticking points involve the alignment of a proposed road and entitlements regarding commercial uses.

The requested zoning would allow development up to 2 million square feet of corporate business park and light industrial uses, as well as 300,000 square feet of support commercial/office on 321.13 acres.The site is on the south side of State Road 52, about a half mile west of Bellamy Brothers Boulevard.

The application, known as Eagle II, was filed by 3KS Family LLLP.

George Southworth, of 3KS Family LLLP, and Cynthia Spidell, a professional land planner, spoke on behalf of the application during the planning board’s May 19 meeting.

“We have a light industrial project. It’s an employment center. We have people that are looking for large, light industrial tracts, and we want to help the county fulfill that vision and bring some jobs to Pasco County,” said Spidell, who works for Stearns Weaver Miller, a law firm in Tampa.

She said her client is willing to reduce the commercial entitlement by 200,000 square feet, if the county is willing to exchange that for additional industrial development.

Chief Assistant County Attorney David Goldstein said the county board has made it clear that it wants to lift restrictions on industrial development in the Central Pasco Employment Village (CPEV).

The CPEV is an area designated by the Pasco County Commission years ago to create a coordinated vision among a group of landowners.

As adopted, the plan envisions a mixed-use employment village on more than 2,400 acres, located along the south side of State Road 52, roughly between the Collier Parkway Extension and Bellamy Brothers Boulevard.The employment village is expected to contain commercial, residential and industrial uses.

A system had been developed to allow landowners to swap entitlements among them- selves, under the county’s supervision. But during the Pasco County Commission’s May 2 meeting, it became clear that at least some board members don’t think that landowners within the CPEV should have to jump through hoops, if they want their sites to be used for industrial development.

Disagreements already have arisen between CPEV landowners over entitlements, and a dispute of a similar nature arose at the May 19 planning board meeting.

Daniel Bergin, representing D&D Ranch of Pasco LLC, an adjacent landowner, asked the planning board to delay the request.

“Eagle II is seeking 300,000 square feet of commercial space,” Bergin said, which he said is inequitable, based on the overall total of commercial allotted within the CPEV.

Bergin asked Andy Joe Scaglione, the adjacent landowner, if he wanted to make some remarks.

“Most of this information was not submitted with the application. That’s why it’s such a mess,” Scaglione said. “I’d like to ask for a continuance because all of this information was not in the application.”

One issue in dispute involves the alignment of a proposed road that would be built on the Eagle II property.

Scaglione and Bergin said they were not aware of the proposed shift.

Goldstein, representing the county’s legal staff, told Scaglione it appears the new alignment would actually benefit Scaglione.

“The eastern side of your property seems somewhat landlocked,” Goldstein said. “What the applicant is saying, is by that moving it, they’re going to build you a road going out to the east.”

If the proposed road is left where it currently is, on the southern boundary, there’s a good chance it would never get built, Goldstein said.

That’s because the county typically doesn’t require landowners to build roads that aren’t needed by their developments, and in this case, the property already has access to State Road 52, Goldstein said.

Still, Scaglione asked for a continuance, say- ing the information came in at the last minute.

Spidell disputed that claim, pointing to a summary of a Nov.8 landowner meeting.

She presented a map to the planning board from that meeting, noting: “This is the map we showed.”

Goldstein asked the applicant if there’s a way to change the alignment of the road on its property, to avoid making a portion of Scaglione’s property unusable.

Southworth said they can provide connectivity, and “they can swing the road and hug their line.”

Goldstein observed: “I think there’s a way that you two could work out a connection point.”

But Southworth wasn’t so sure: “We aren’t going to work out a connection point with Andy Scaglione. It won’t ever happen.”

Planning board Chairman Charles Grey responded:“I don’t think that’s necessary.”

Ultimately, planning board members voted 3- 2 to delay the request until their June 16 meeting. Planning board members Jaime Girardi and Roberto Saez dissented.

That allows the parties time to have a meeting, to see if they can resolve their issues.

After the planning board makes its recommendation, the request moves on to the Pasco County Commission, which has final jurisdiction on zoning and land use issues.

Mixed-use project approved in Connected City

By

The Pasco County Commission has approved a mixed-use development made up of 525 residences and 106,285 square feet of office uses on 158 acres, in an area known as Connected City.

The site, which is currently vacant and used for agricultural purposes, is at the northeast corner of Elam and Kenton roads, about 6,600 feet east of Interstate 75.

The Connected City corridor consists of about 7,800 acres in a state-approved development district meant to foster residential communities and employment centers that are the wave of the future. Its borders are Interstate 75, State Road 52, and Curley and Overpass roads.

The area is meant to feature cutting-edge technology, including gigabit Internet speeds and innovation.

The rezoning had been recommended for approval, with conditions, by the Pasco County Planning Commission and county planners.

The approved residences are expected to consist of a mix of single-family detached, attached and/or multifamily, courtyard houses, row houses, townhouses and possibly garden-style apartments.

This particular area of Connected City is known as the Community Hub, which is intended to be used for projects that create a blend of employment and housing opportunities, according to Clarke Hobby, the attorney for the applicant.

That portion of the plan requires medium density standards of 3.25 residences per acre.

Withlacoochee River Electric Cooperative owns 12.18 acres of the site.

Hobby noted that extensive efforts have been made to mitigate impacts on neighbors, including a series of private agreements relating to trees, landscaping and buffering.

Eight of the 10 neighbors signed letters of no objection.

Michael Pultorak, who lives on Kenton Road, expressed concerns about the potential for area flooding, if the water levels rise in King Lake.

Pultorak told the board that he’s pro-development and pro-responsible growth, but he is concerned about potential flooding in the area.

He said he realized that this particular project may not cause the potential flooding he’s concerned about, but said the next one could.

He asked the board to intervene to prevent that from happening.

Commissioner Mike Moore told Pultorak he would make sure that someone would be out to meet Pultorak for a closer look at the issue.

Board members voted 4-0 to grant the rezoning, with Commissioner Ron Oakley, absent.

Published June 01, 2022

Pasco expected to add 250,000 people

By

Pasco County has been growing rapidly in recent years, and that trend is expected to continue.

“You have over 250,000 people in the pipeline that are expected to move to the county by the Year 2045,” Steve Schukraft, a planner with HDR Engineering Inc., told the Pasco County Planning Commission, during its April 21 meeting.

So, over the next 25 years or so, Pasco is “going to add the number of people, that’s similar in a scale, to all of the people who are living in the city of Tampa,” said the planner, whose company has been hired to help Pasco County update its comprehensive plan.

“When you look at the curve, that’s a similar rate of growth as you’ve experienced, since around 1980,” Schukraft said.

Knowing how many vehicles are traveling down a road is essential information for future planning of roads, developments and various services. Here is a look at a backup of traffic heading east on State Road 54, waiting at a traffic signal at S.R. 54 and U.S. 41. (File)

“There is a lot of development in the pipeline. Shaping that development is really fundamental. Preparing for it, serving it, shaping it — is really critical,” the planning consultant added.

Local governments, under state law, must develop comprehensive plans.

“Comprehensive plans provide your authority to zone. So, it’s a fundamental basis for your land development code. But it also provides guidance for capital investment programs, conservation investments, transportation programs,” Schukraft said.

In the 2050 update, he added, “we’re folding in some of the work the county is doing, related to sustainability and resilience.”

Completing the update is expected to take five years. The first two years have focused on primarily research and beginning to think about the broad structure of the plan. Next, the plan elements will be drafted, and finally, the Pasco County Commission will adopt a new plan.

“The most minor approach would be a strike-through and add-in to the existing document, but there’s a possibility to restructure segments of it, in a more significant way. So, that’s what we’re trying to find out, what’s appropriate,” Schukraft said.

“We’ve been doing a series of work sessions with groups around the county, to supplement our research in the more technical aspects of growth and development, across Pasco County,” he added.

The consultants are diving into past planning processes, in the documentation and feedback that the county has received through various activities and is supplementing that with listening sessions.

The listening sessions focus on perceptions of the county’s assets and challenges and ideas about what should be done to build a better future, the consultant said.

The county also has gathered feedback from the community in recent years, and that data, along with information gleaned through the listening sessions will be used to create an Issues and Ideas Report, he said.

Listening sessions aim to gain greater insights
Schukraft explained how the listening sessions work.

“As we talk to people, we ask them: ‘Do you know about the plan?’ ‘Are you aware of development that’s going to happen around you?’

He told the planning board: “I can tell you our observation is that, it’s kind of hard, when you look at the plan, to know that. To know what’s coming.

“If you were uninitiated and you pulled up the county’s comprehensive plan, or went to the web site, it’s really tough to tell what’s going to happen around the corner, up the road, down the road, and the timing of that.

A new apartment community, Avidity Living, is one of the latest new residential options on State Road 54 and Oak Grove Boulevard, in Land O’ Lakes. Pasco County is expected to attract about 250,000 new residents by 2045.

“So, one of the things we need to do in this process is make the future more transparent, so people understand, what’s in the pipeline, what’s committed, what’s next and where the sort of edges between different kinds of development occur.”

He also shared observations regarding the county’s long-range planning and zoning processes.

“We have early notions that it appears you spend an awful lot of time doing comprehensive plan amendments, which are kind of like land development code approval actions. And, they’re almost stacked right on top of one another.

“The comp plan is supposed to be a larger policy document that guides broader decisions, and the land development code is where things get executed and detailed.

“So, there may be a way to separate those two documents a little bit, so you’ve got higher level guidance in the comp plan and then you use your land development code to detail how projects get delivered, location by location.

“So, if it’s minor uptick in density on a project, maybe the comp plan can absorb that level of change, if it doesn’t change the character of a broad area.

“The land development code, if you want to change your zoning, that becomes a separate discussion, about appropriateness, about compatibility, about impacts on roadways, schools, public facilities,” Schukraft said.

David Goldstein, chief assistant county attorney addressed the consultant: “Can I ask you a question about that, though, because most of what we process are amendments to the future land use map. Are you suggesting that we not have a future land use map?”

Schukraft responded: “You need to have a future land use map. You don’t have to have the lan -use map you have now. It could be a more generalized map. That’s a possibility that we could look into. Because right now, your future land use map and your land development code are practically the same thing.

“You wouldn’t be doing amendments at every meeting. You’d be doing amendments on a three-month, six-month, cycle, that would be broader-scale amendments.”

Schukraft went on: “The thought of that is that long-range planning could focus more on the long-range questions. Your short-range, your zoning and land development code staff, could focus on the land development code questions.

“They wouldn’t be stacked up and doing similar things,” he said.

Goldstein also told Schukraft that the county’s current comprehensive plan contains a number of policies that says the county will adopt amendments to the land development code by certain deadlines, but that hasn’t happened.

Schukraft responded: “Where there’s time frames and commitments indicated in the comp plan that staff hasn’t been able to deliver for various reasons, it’s really fundamental to get that cleaned up.”

Planning board members told Schukraft that they would like a longer session to delve deeper into issues and the consultant said that will be arranged.

Published May 04, 2022