[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] okay on a call meeting call to order the Planning Commission meeting of May 16th 2024 if we can uh start uh please rise for a moment of silence and Pledge of Allegiance allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the for it stands one nation God indivisible liy and justice for all okay uh Madam clerk can you call the role Mr J Gerard here Mr Christopher P here Mr John Moody here Mr Matthew Ms here Mr dlet Mr Chris Chris Williams here chairman Charles Gray okay um for those of you that haven't been here before I'm just going to go over a few things real quick um the Planning Commission serves as a local planning agency we hold public hearings and transmit to the board of County Commissioners recommendations on comprehensive plan amendments Land Development code amendments rezonings and conditional use requests the Planning Commission is the final decision-making body for special exceptions certain appeals variance requests and certain alternative standard requests however final decisions may be appeal to the bo Board of County Commissioners if anyone is in opposition to any comprehensive plan Amendment Land Development code Amendment rezoning conditional use or any item where the Planning Commission transmits a recommendation to the board of County Commissioners it is important that you attend the appropriate Board of County Commissioners meeting um do we have any minutes to approve yes we do we do motion to approve second okay that's a motion to approve the me the minutes from the April 4th 2024 meeting correct seconded any other comment all in favor I opposed motion carries all right the the first thing we're going to do today I guess first if if you have any cell phones or pagers please make sure they're in a silent position so we're not interrupted and the first thing we'll do is um take any public comment on any items that are not on today's agenda so is there anybody here to speak to anything not on the agenda okay perfect and Mr chair for the record we have no one signed up to speak on WebEx neither for public comment nor for any of the items on the agenda okay very good um so next we'll move on to the public hearing procedures portion of the agenda uh for those that aren't familiar haven't been to a meeting before there's three sections in the the agenda is broken down into three sections first are withdrawals um second or continuances and then consent and then I said three but there's actually four then there's the regular items will be heard after all those items um public hearing procedures inperson participants and participants attending through WebEx including the applicants who are pre-registered for the Planning Commission meeting will be notified by County staff when they're permitted to speak applicants are limited to 5 minutes and other participants are limited to three minutes unless additional time is approved at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting I don't think we have anybody today do we Denise that is correct no one has requested additional time uh if you come up to speak um we ask that you uh first you'll be sworn and we we'll swear everybody in at one time here in a minute um but when you come up to speak please announce your name address and then the agenda item or the agenda title that you're going to speak with and then your three minute timer will start um today I believe there are nine items in total on the agenda um plus an ordinance at the end um there's one withdrawal item two continuances five consent and then the ordinance at the end of the agenda that'll be part of the regular agenda um the consent items when we go through the agenda they'll be approved as a a vote alog together unless anything's pulled from the consent and then once a motion is made the chair will call for a second and the motion will be voted on um do we have proof of publication clerk the items are advertised in the Tampa base times on April 3rd 2024 April 17th 2024 and May 2024 and by Affidavit of certified mailings and site postings okay and then the the last thing before we get started if anybody's planning to speak um today during the agenda if we can stand to be sworn in do you swear the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you guys okay good afternoon Mr chair Planning Commission members Denise Hernandez planning and E economic growth Department first item is PC2 which is peg2 24 7768 it's a special exception in the name of John isuki um on this item it's been withdrawn from consideration so there's no further action required okay following item is item PC3 Peg 24 7739 it's a zoning Amendment Fletcher mpud Mary L Fletcher revocable trust and Richard D Fletcher the request is to continue the item to the June 20th 2024 Planning Commission meeting at 1:30 in Newport Richie okay is the applicant present is there anybody here to speak on this item okay go to the next one following item is pc4 Peg 24336 on this item you're sitting as a local planning agency it's a um land development code Amendment and it was notified for continuance um it is the continuance date is to the local planning agency meeting on 620 2024 at 1:30 in Newport Richie okay um is there anybody here to speak on this item okay and that all the continuous items Denise that is correct okay do we have a motion motion to approve uh items PC3 and pc4 continue to June 20th in Newport Rie second okay a motion a second any other discussion all in favor I opposed motion carries following item pc5 which is Peg 2477 A3 in the name of Deon and Jordana vinovich is um going to be pulled from consent we do have some folks here who are in opposition to the item so we're going to move on to item pc6 and that is Peg 24774 it's in the name of William J and Brent a Norwood Norwood irrevocable trust and Norwood Workshop LLC Norwood irrevocable trust is for a change in zoning from an r1mh single family mobile home district and C2 General commercial district with conditions to a C2 General commercial district with a voluntarily agreed upon deed restriction related to the live local act comes here with a recommendation of approval okay is the applicant present is there anybody here do you want to speak okay is there anybody here to speak on this item okay anything from up here be good [Applause] okay move on to the following item item pc7 is Peg 24776 it's a zoning Amendment Wilson jader and Matthew Hernandez it's for a change in zoning from an mpud master plan unit development District to an AR agricultural residential district comes you with a recommendation of approval okay is the applicant present uh on this one I'm going to read a couple of of Corrections into the to the um into the record so those were sent to the Planning Commission members and also to the clerk's office there was incorrect notation in the references section in terms of the location of the board meeting so it should say PC at NPR 5164 BCC at NPR 61824 and then also in finding of fact number eight um the there were three um following actions on the site and now they're listed as two which is the correct actions that occurred on the site again those have been provided to the clerk's office okay okay um is there anybody here to speak on this item anything from up here okay next one next item you're sitting as a local planning agency it's item PC8 peg2 2498 it is a comprehensive plan Amendment CPAs 237 Hudson commercial it's for comprehensive plan Amendment to the Future land use maps 2-15 and sheto 3 changing from iindustrial light to Comm on approximately 4.82 Acres of property located on the north side of New York Avenue um if you would please take public comment on this item we're asking that you find the item consistent with the Pascal County comprehensive plan and that you recommend the approval to the board of County Commissioners okay is the applicant present is there anybody here to speak on this item anything from podas okay and then the following item is pc9 you're also sitting as a local planning Agency on this matter it's p24 0262 comprehensive plan Amendment CPAs 2325 52 realy Commercial is for comprehensive plan amendment to Future land use maps 2-15 and Sheet 12 um which is changing from res 3 residential three dwelling units uh per acre to Comm commercial o office and Co conservation on approximately 8.84 Acres on the south side of State Road 52 approximately 3,300 ft west of Lando Lakes Boulevard uh on this item if you would please take public comment we're asking that you find it consistent with the County comprehensive plan and recommend approval to the board of County Commissioners okay is the applicant present is there anybody here to speak on this item okay there anything from up here all right and I think that's concludes your consent agenda only consent okay so we have PC 6 S 8 and n on the consent so motion to approve the consent order consisting a PC pc7 PC8 pc9 with the corrections noted to pc7 that Denise read into the record okay is there a second motion a second any other discussion all in F favor I I oppose motion carries thank you okay so back to pc5 welcome Liam thank you good afternoon Liam deine planning and economic growth department so this is pc5 peg2 24773 and I'm going to try to pronounce this name the best I can and I apologize for pronouncing it wrong um Deon Gordana bovich which I'm sure I pronounced that wrong so I do apologize this is a UK cleaning zoning Amendment from AR with conditions to AR agriculture residential district without conditions the future land juice Is Res 3 under the comprehensive plan the applicant proposes to subdivide the property and build one additional single family dwelling on a new lot in conformance with the AR agriculture residential district um standards I would like to note that there is no voluntary deed restriction with this so with this rezoning it could allow up to four dwelling units um the subject site is located in the northwest corner of seab Biscuit Lane and G up Lane it's located in the North Market area and is out side of the urban concentration in rural areas here is our context map here's a zoomed in aerial of the subject site the surrounding future land use Is Res 3 and the surrounding zoning is AR agricultural residential the subject site contains a single family dwelling and approximately 5.07 acres and access to the site is from seab Biscuit Lane and GID up Lane which are both Ingress egress easements with a um approximately 50 ft of width for those easements on June 27th 206 the board of um the board of County Commissioners BCC approved rezoning um petition number 6530 to add these conditions um there were two conditions added to that one of the conditions were specifically rezoning approval that only allowed um a minimum lot size to be 5 acres per lot um the other one required the total acreage not have to go through subdivision review so there could only be subdivided 12 times each lot would have to be five acres um for the minimum lot size and did not require to go through subdivision review again by approving this res zoning request you would be removing all of the conditions requiring the applicant to go through subdivision review allowing him to subdivide the property one addition well another time to build his one single family home that he proposes and this is coming with recommendation for approval from planning and economic growth Department okay any question you have any questions any questions for Liam did you say he would or would not be required to go through the subdivision so the previous Zone rezoning Action had a condition that did not require them to go through subdivision review um if he rezones he would be required to go through sub division review because you would be removing that condition I see and then the deed restriction you said there was no deed restriction so this could potentially allow for additional not for additional four in total four total lots and is there a reason did staff ask for AED restriction staff did not ask for AED restriction okay okay any other questions okay um is the applicant present would you like to speak at this time or I'm assuming we have other people so I guess uh we'll now take public comment on this item the first person signed up to speak is David Ester good afternoon David eser 11512 C Biscuit Lane Hudson Florida 34669 um as you mentioned this has already gone through this process once before at that time we deter we we fought it hard but we did agree and we gave into allowing for five acre laws but the whole intention of that area was to be nothing less than 5 Acres um so that our homes would be protected and maintain a certain uh level you know they're all block homes they're all um wellmaintained we our roads can could handle the traffic even when Mariano came out and visited he agreed the roads were not in condition for that the um changing this even though just impacts one particular thing opens the door to all the other neighbors doing the same thing wanting to split W to sell off another piece more and more homes coming in nobody taking ownership of fixing the roads uh things like that we've even put the road to a vote test before to try and turn it over to the county and get it paved so that we could have um better condition like even mail at our houses instead of down at the uh kitten Trail uh that requires 100% approval so adding this house in you're impacting our road uh impact without 100% approval of us our roads have been smooth out a little bit he dumped a bunch of concrete uh there was no meeting there was no can we do this there was no agreement to put that stuff down to put to change the roads to impact uh that or to even it can no longer be graded I can't maintain it myself it's solid concrete have to watch out for Sharp rocks sticking up um we can't have another house another septic tank another well we just the county just approved I was just in a meeting not too long ago they approved over 300 homes behind us if you wanted smaller property sell your house and go somewhere and get that that's the way I look at it I bought two properties I bought one for me and my in-laws bought the one next to me uh we're not looking to subdivide them uh originally people were looking to subdivide them into one acre lots which then is gonna downgrade the type of homes that go on there um from nice homes that are probably well over 400 500,000 in value to trailers and we're looking to avoid that why I like to accommodate especially if it's a family need and split the property I got a family member coming in at the same time I don't want to open up that door to the next property next to them doing the same thing the two across from them doing that now I've got four houses on the road I just went through construction of a new house in front of me I can't tell you how many times I couldn't get down the road because of construction equipment blocking the entire pathway even though I have um 22% interest in that easement and they have 6% interest in that easement and now you're going to split it more um this is this is a ongoing problem we're going to add that more construction if we open it up to other homes that's going to be even more problematic um so what I'd like to compromise I just don't want to open that door and removing that condition that was put in place and already split that property once now we're going to do it again I I want to avoid that [Music] um and I think I covered I they told me three minutes I I've tried to skim through it all that was your last that was your three minute timer try to wrap it up real quick I tried to get it all I'm sorry I didn't know it was a three minute time limit yeah no problem thank you for coming though all right any questions for me or all right the next person signed up to speak is Linda reri good afternoon my name is Linda reiri I live at 11528 C Biscuit Lane and that was my son-in-law the only thing that I'm going to add is that uh commissioner Mariana attended a resident meeting that we had and he personally observed the road he agreed that splitting Parcels was not in the best interest of the residents and the commission the commission denied the request he physically came out he swore exactly you know uh how the roads are what the conditions are and it's not a good idea to split it again uh we we thought we finished that but it came up again when was this meeting H when was the meeting that commissioner Mariano came out and five years ago 2006 2006 2006 we've been there for 20 years yeah yeah and uh like he said when we bought it we bought five acres each with not any intentions of splitting it you know we we want to keep the Integrity of of our development uh a lot of people have moved in and put a lot of uh there's more horses there's more animals on the property which is nice uh we don't want to uh upset that so and I had other things to say but my son-in-law said it again so already so I don't want to waste your time but I don't feel it's a good idea to to allow this to happen very good thanks for coming I don't have anyone else signed up to speak on this matter okay um as the applicant now you guys do have a time to you can come up and rebut anything you heard or you can come up and do your presentation now if you want to come up and speak good afternoon guys my name is Dian ASO 14565 g a plane so when we moved there what 5 years ago four four years ago you could barely pass through that road there was potholes you would literally have to drive onto the neighbor's property to get by we volunteered with a couple other neighbors to bring in you know Road stuff that to fix it up so it was fine and that Endy so we're just trying to add another home to the property I guess this is the process that we have to go through to hopefully get there but we're just trying to get one more house for my in-laws on there there will be no further development you know or selling so whatever deed restriction we need to add on it that's absolutely fine with us okay anything from up here I question for staff when they come back okay um yeah I guess the problem I I guess the problem that's created in why the whole issue the deed restrictions came up is because if it's just approved the way it is it opens the door for not only you but also your neighbors and kind of sets the Precedence for in the future for the subdivision as Liam explained that goes to four lots for your instead of one lot it becomes four and then it kind of but it also says only block homes meanwhile the neighbor across from us was allowed to put a module home there I don't know by who or how or what but so those restrictions that were put in in you said once that is only block you know that doesn't exist anymore since we have a fully modular home right across the street from us yeah I don't David as far as enforcement of deed restrictions I mean is that go back to the building department or is there a deed restriction I don't think there is a deed restrict well okay I don't know if they have a private deed restriction but in terms of the public restrictions I don't think there's any Liam can tell me if I'm wrong the prior conditions of approval didn't require block hes did they the prior the conditions on the current zoning District that's on there does not require block homes so I'm not sure what where this requirement is that you're talking about he just mentioned that the block hom so I wasn't aware if there's any details as maybe they're all voluntarily putting block homes but I I'm not aware unless there's some private restrictions out there that's not a county imposed requirement no definitely not no as far as m maintenance of the roads Go I mean those are private roads out there so who's responsible to maintain those just is there there looks like there's probably an easement it's a good I mean I don't know guys I mean we've been there for four years and as I said as when we moved in literally you would have to drive onto the neighbor as property to go up the road since it was falling apart and and that the Sugar Sand was that coming through so nobody has maintain the road since Mickey did it the last time so I don't know what they're talking about about grading I haven't seen him on a tractor once okay so Liam is the are the easements County RightWay easements or are they private Ingress ESS easements if you give me a moment let me double check on that I don't want to give you a wrong answer yeah and just for we can't take comments from the the audience there to be able to pick it up on the microphone for the clerk so I mean finding too in the agenda memo says they're Ingress egress easements but I guess we'll let Liam confirm they're not I'm confirming it by looking at their legal at their legal description there are Ingress and egress easements so there's no County or public right to use these roads I don't know the answer to that David I just know that they're Ingress they're called out as Ingress and negro cements they are listed they it is a named Road giddy up lane for example is a named Road it is listed as privately maintained residential well was this area it's not platted then those aren't platted it is not platted um hence the um condition of approval stating that they didn't have to go through subdivision review so and David I don't know if you want to get in I'll ask you a legal question I don't know if you got the answer or not we see this often where someone will Deed by meats and Bounds a piece of property and then less or and then subject to an Ingress egress easement over 15 ft or 25 ft when they create that Ingress egress easement does that necessarily give gives give the beneficiary of that easement any right to improve the easement my my understanding of an easement is you now have the right to go across that area of land but you don't necessarily have the right to pave that land or grade that land or do anything else with it I I without seeing the easement I don't know that I can answer the question because it depends on the terms of the easement I see I don't have the easement that you're referring to to know what but I think you would generally have the right to maintain it so that you has to maintain it if it's an if it's an Ingress egress eent you need to make improvements to allow you to Ingress an egress to your property I think you have that right because otherwise you would lose the benefit of your Ingress and igress SE the problem is Sir that that's a Sugar Sand AO area so as soon as the top layer of whatever is applied to it breaks loose the Sugar Sand just just comes up and you just cannot drive through that without a 4x4 or anything so it's not like it's just a flat dirt road you know that nobody takes care of like it has to be maintained in in order that to be AO usable and did I hear you say you were willing to deed restrict this to no no I was just saying uh that if you need to put any restrictions onto my property you know that I'm only allowed to do this one zoning just to allow one dwelling you know I'm totally okay with that I'm not planning on developing something there and selling of lots or something you know it's my family property so we're planning on the staying there I understand and did the staff talk to you about ar1 zoning what that the difference between AR and ar1 is AR allows for mobile homes where ar1 only allows for siteb Built Homes I mean to be honest with you sir I came in here I mean to your colleagues to ask to build a house you know they started this whole process I'm just going along as so I'm not requiring any kind of resoning or anything but I just want to know how I can put another dwelling on the property so whatever you tell me it's fine I'm just what I'm trying to find out is if you would be opposed if we made a recommendation for ar1 zoning which would then require that any home that you built on that site be a siteb built home I don't want to say a block home because it could be a wood frame home but it would have to be a site built home well definitely we already have the blueprints for for it might easier if he's doing a deed restriction to just put in the DED restriction another way yes he can just deed restricted that it's one additional siteb buil home that's easier I think than changing the zoning application to something else what would be this so whatever the easiest way is most painless way to get this done that's Denise in 2006 did the AR is it ar5 did that exist yes I'm just kind of curious I don't know if you know the history and it probably doesn't matter that they zoned at AR but then conditioned it being upon being 5 acre lots rather than one acre lots it's it's very strange to me because say there's ar5 adjacent to the north so that I don't understand why they didn't do an ar5 but yes it did exist in 2006 oh okay Liam knows the answer and it doesn't have to be one acre sir I mean if I have to like split it in half whichever whatever number comes up to I don't think the I'm listening to the neighbors I'm hearing the neighbors concerns and I hear your intent m and I don't think there's probably not anybody up here that has any problem with what you're proposing it's what happens if you all of a sudden decide to sell the property or you should have some tragic loss in the family you know you you've got to sell this and the next guy comes along and then wants to divide it up in the one acre lots so I think that's what any concern here might be I'm not I'm not even quite sure I have a concern about that well that's why I said if if you want to put that Deed on it that it cannot be subdivided anymore ASO further I'm totally okay with that I and I appreciate that I do okay so here's the answer so so basically what occurred at the hearing in 2006 is that um the there was a motion for denial and that motion actually carried through then commissioner Mariano within that motion for denial directed staff to do a staff initiated resoning for the area to ar5 because the folks in the room I suppose wanted to move forward with with the zoning action they're like well why can't we just put a condition on the AR that they're 5 acre lots and then that other condition that stated that they don't have to go through subdivision review was added so but originally there was a request from commissioner Mariano to do a staff initiated resoning to ar5 is a less stringent think or more stringent I should say zoning District so I don't know why they couldn't have just moved approval of ar5 at the dis I don't know the answer to that but that's what was offered up by the development director and the then um acting zoning administrator I guess either way though they they would be seeking a rezoning anyway from even if it was currently or they'd be seeking a resoning instead of from AR they'd be seeking it from ar5 I understand have you spoken to commissioner Mariano since he's the guy that made this recommendation me yes no no sir I [Music] didn't no we have not spoken to commission Mariano years should I I mean I wasn't advised to since it's been like almost 20 years well I'm commissioner Mariano's appointment to this board M I'm hesitant to make a motion that is contrary to something he did in the past maybe he has had a change of heart or change of mind and I think it might be a wise idea if you were to consult with commissioner Mariano and maybe the neighbors should consult with commissioner Mariano and I would tell you that I'm probably leaning towards a continuance to allow you to go do that the other reason a continuance might be advisable is there's no deed restriction before you I mean normally when an applicant wants to propose a deed restriction it's on your agenda like you you actually yes yeah there's been a a couple of times it hasn't but yeah I agree with you but it's obviously up to the Planning Commission yeah I mean my my concern on on this one just frankly is that it sounds like the roads are problematic as they are and even though it's only one person one house one additional lot we're adding more traffic to that road um without a mechanism to improve it correct that's my issue with that and I generally wouldn't be opposed to this this kind of thing other than that there was already a past decision that 5 Acres was the appropriate zoning whether it be ar1 with a condition or I'm sorry AR with a condition or ar5 times have changed and maybe he's changed his mind so I did we did we get an answer on the roads on what they the ownership of the roads was or did you get have find any more information on that I didn't find anything else I don't know if Denise found anything else I have not well if they're not County maintained that means the county does not own them by maintenance the only other way I could think we would own them would be by deed or plat but it's not platted so unless somebody deed these roads to the county which seems unlikely is the property appraiser showing them as sh is private private m y y I don't think I I think they're all privately owned yeah my my concern with this one is the precedent that it sets for the neighborhood and I I agree with commissioner Moody that' feel more comfortable if that matters was discussed with um commissioner Mariano honestly and I would Echo that I mean you open the door for all the neighbors to do that right yeah I don't want to deny you today because I'd like to right I can tell you person I'd like to speak to him about this um like I said this is it's not quite 20 years since the resoning happened and things are different in the county today I don't know whether he feels the same way today as he did then but I think it would be behoove all of us to take a breather for a minute and then get his opinion on this and then take the matter up again so I'd make the motion to continue this to a date uncertain to well sorry I only cringe because I I don't want to have to do Ren noticing and add that additional expense I ask staff what would be the next available date that we could hear this that would allow time for you guys maybe to set up a discussion and maybe have the commissioner make a field trip out there I don't know what whatever he wants to do so then I don't know that this is going to allow us enough time but the next Planning Commission meeting that is on on this side of the county is June 18th the one that follows that is July 25th do you want to con continue it to July 25th so that that does provide enough time okay okay there's a motion for continuance to July 25th is there a second a second okay uh any other discussion up here do we have to be here in person all right all in favor I opposed so will be continued to July 25th Newport Richie thank you thank you okay all right so the next item or the last item is pc1 Roberto you have this one sir all right good afternoon chair and Commissioners Roberto um development review Department thank you we got reorganized or we're still working on that still working on that uh today we are presenting to you uh uh soning Amendment uh an ordinance by the pasu County Board County Commissioners amending the pasu County Land Development code to address invasive vegetation and amending sections 43.1 let me stop here you don't need to read the whole title at Planning Commission oh okay that you do at the board but not a Planning Commission so all right well we're uh here to title I'm just saving you some vation I was going to ask you if you needed some water but you're good thank you David that sa that save you some time it's the weed Amendment um so this is amendment number 49 and the proposed amendments were uh uh pre previewed by the interest department on March 28th and also by a present of the horizontal round table on April 17th and the invasive vegetation uh removal we are amending quite a few sections of the code most of them are relying on the construction element and anticipation of any construction of those for example on the uh pdps preliminary development plat residentials the non- residentials the preliminary side plans uh basically these sections are amended to require that applicant for the for these approvals must include I have it to here an invasive vegetation management plan and management imp perpetuity uh this amendment also adds that invas invasive vegetation requirements contained uh on the Count's targeted Invasion species list found on the development review manual and these are based on the Florida invasive species Council we're going to refer that to uh Fisk so I going to still trying to remember that uh and this is a list that holds about 175 species uh and this list they have two types which are the category one and categories twos the category ones are the ones are more aggressive the category to are are not as aggressive as the ones and sometimes the Fisk or or that group they they um not sometimes they evaluate it and sometimes they move them from the category one to the category two or from category two to the category one and sometimes they even eliminate some of these invasive species so um but we're going to base this amendment with the development review manual the they also include an invasive management plan requiring removal of invasive vegetation bmps providing for the appropriate method of disposal to prevent propagation and ongoing maintenance and monitoring controls of invasive species not all the invasive plants can be eliminated the same manner some of them can be mechanically removed some of them can be trimmed some of them can be burned and some of days they cannot they cannot be trimmed they cannot be they had to they had to be different methods of removal but all those are also going to be included in the development review manual so the invasive vegetation management plan also be managed in perpetuity by the HOA the CDD the property the prop property owner or the applicable entity or assigned responsible party so with that in mind we are amending sections uh 40 3.1 again like I said the preliminary development plan residentials section 403 the preliminary development plan non-residential mix use section 403 the preliminary s plans um and these are new subsections that we're including uh section 40 3.4 storm water management 43.5 the construction plans again these are new sections that we're including uh section 403 field on this one we need to be also careful that the field that is brought in that does not have some of these uh seeds or it's not contaminated with any of these invasive species Romas or any other elements so that's pretty much the intent of this one it's also new subsection uh Mass grading uh section 43.7 uh 40 3.10 landscape and then also we're going to amend the operating permit sections which is 41.3 which is a minor land excavation 44.2 uh it's a land escavation operating permit the mining permit on Section 44.3 44.4 uh construction demolition debris disposal facilities operating permits 44.5 lines spreading operating permits 40 4.6 yard trash uh processing facilities and also we're also doing the RightWay use permit 40 6.4 so as you see the anything that has to do with dirt or soil movement uh we we were trying to capture on all these sections uh some of the sections are already um well I haven't got yet the uh Garden plant permit which is for section four four 46.8 uh section 503 which is the supplemental regulations and now we're also revising some of this language like on the overlay and special district areas uh Northeast Pasco rural protection areas which was um um kind of included some of these elements but we're revising it uh uh natural and cultural resources protection uh section 84.8 for ecological corridors uh we're clarifying what some of these invasive species and then uh on chapter 900 which is the development standards we are adding subsections on 91.2 the transportation Corridor Management on 9003 91.3 which is the access management uh 91.4 substandard roadway uh 91.6 the uh Street design and dedication requirements uh 91.6 we're also adding language and bicycle facilities 91.7 and pedestrian facilities 91.8 I didn't new soft sections and adding a new definition for invasive vegetation or invasive plant species and we find the proposed ordinance Amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and ask of you to recommend approval for the board of County Commissioners I'm missing one second and this uh Amendment will go to the BCC on um if you recommend approval it'll go to the BCC on June 4th for the first reading and then he'll go to June 18th for the adoption any questions so when I met with you a little more than a week ago we talked about was it necessary to include the submitt requirement for an invasive species evaluation for applications which didn't necessarily authorize construction substandard roadway access management and now I'm looking at preliminary development plan because I just pulled up in munic code that it says the pre in E under preliminary development plan effective approval of PDP auth authorizes developer to apply for storm water management plan and report review construction plan review draft record plat review when no improvements are required so I'm curious as why the need I understand why the why the request when there was going to be construction but why the need if there's not construction authorized by the approval I mean and a lot of times I see Barbara sitting back there she may be involved in a resoning where we're looking at whether or not evaluating whether or not roads are substandard and shall have the traffic engineer apply for substandard Road review and they may determine a road substandard needs to be approved but that doesn't authorize the construction you still have to prepare a construction plan for the improvements and acquire a right of-way permit to do that so I'm personally hesitant to saddle an applicant at very early stages of a project would this requirement when they get to the construction phase I get it I understand I just think maybe we're potentially creating an unnecessary burden in the early and planning stages of a project and correct me if I'm wrong you want to go ahead uh we uh we did to we did take some uh your your comments I saw you did and I appreciate that thank you um so you're you're right it doesn't have to be startled until the construction piece comes along um and and I to my understanding there's really no reason for not to bring the applicant to the understanding that this is what's expected of them well of course soone could issue a condition make it a standard condition that you're going to submit and we see that all the time for instance someone comes in and applies for an mpud zoning and there'll be a standard condition that you'll have to come and do a 100% gopher touris survey before you construct but they don't have to do a 100% goer ttis survey to apply for a rezoning and so I question whether it's necessary that they go out and do an invasive species inventory and then especially we haven't gotten to that part about what's required in the inventory but that seems like a bit of an honorous burden on them during the preliminary planning phases of project again the construction phases I get it it just seems that maybe we could eliminate it for the preliminary development plan the access management I understand if we want to put conditions and I think in the access management you actually weren't making it a submitt requirement it was a maintenance condition I get that that's fine but substandard Road review that doesn't actually authorize any construction but that has been fixed reest I don't know maybe it's not in this I'm scrolling now trying to find it because I actually made that edit myself I don't see aedine ver it's down at the it's at the bottom of the agenda memo Elizabeth it's at the end it's in the memo itself so under sub it says 91.4 substandard roadway analysis and mitigation e submitt information 8 and then then it says if determined that roadway deficiencies are required to be corrected compliance with the subsection shall be required identify all invasive [Music] vegetation it would seem to so I thought I right that you know you they still have to get a rightaway permit to do any substandard roadway mitigation so that would be something you would do for the RightWay permit I don't care where it is if it's in sub away just away as as the situation ised yeah I again my concern is I just hate to see burdening an applicant in a planning phase of a project in early phases with doing something that's more applicable at time of construction and then if I may so I know I met with y'all and I I appreciate the information I still had a couple questions and just so you all know what I brought up I mean it's one thing if we're developing like a 20 acre School site and clearing the whole thing and building the school the example I gave to staff was our Cypress Creek Campus we have a middle school high school we have over 200 Acres of wetlands and we we built the high school first my concern is probably along your maybe some of you are thinking too is the way this reads and I know y all told me it's confined within the project area but that's my concern is if I'm going out and developing out of 150 acres I'm developing 50 acres the way I you know and I'm constructing the high school the way I read it is I'm I'm required to look at all of the upins even though I know you guys said oh it's only confined to the project area but it says that I'm to look at anything Lo all those located on the UPS so to me when I read that that's my entire property and and my concern is having to how much money am I going to have to spend to do all the Uplands and then it says Those portions of wetlands where impacts are authorized so let's say I impact an acre of that 200 those 200 Acres of Wetlands I know you said it was only focused on the project area but I'm afraid that 10 years from now somebody else going to interpret that to mean the entire 200 Acres of wetlands and then I think about what kind of cost is that and again I don't I don't I'm not against trying to get rid of invasive species but I sit there and think how much it's going to cost me to send people out in 200 Acres of wetlands and come up with a management if I'm not really impacting that much so that was one of my questions and I know and I know we've talked about it but I'm I'm just letting you know I'm still a little concerned with the language of that and how it might be interpreted later on where was this Chris I think it's pretty much all the same I'm looking at 90 I just pulled one from 91.6 oh okay D where it says um identify all invasive vegetation dot dot dot located on the Uplands and within In Those portions of wetlands where impacts are authorized and so if I'm if I'm impacting one acre of that 200 Wetlands I I see it could be interpreted both ways and that's my that's one of my concerns and then the other thing you guys uh I know you uh it's been mentioned a little bit but again part of my concern was the cost on this fill and I as my engineer he didn't really know having and I was hoping maybe some of you Engineers could fill it in so if I if we're building a school and you know like LL the K8 we're building we just had to bring in $3 million worth of fill uh is that normally tested for invasive species or or or how much more would would and again if you're putting a building over the top of it versus those are some I'm concerned about cost I was going to ask that was going to be one of my next questions about the fill right cuz there's a condition that your fi can't contain any seeds right I've been doing this 30 years I know of no soil test that's what I thought that is going to be able to go through right and identify if there are seeds from some invasive exotic or nuisance species or seeds from anything else for that matter just period the end where does one I don't know how much I'm sure you guys are not I have to deal with this every day but you don't go out and buy dirt when I go out and buy dirt I'm buying you know clean fill right there's nobody's inspecting this for noxious weed seeds and I don't know of any way for them to do that I mean i' I guess I could send it to some Lab at some University and pay them a couple $1,000 and they could do that I understand your intent I'm just not sure that the requirement itself is practical ask the follow question wouldn't the if you're requiring an invasive species management plan on that same property where the fil's brought in wouldn't that require them to basically get rid of any invasive species that grow out of those seeds anyway so if the property owner is already obligated to basically stop the growth of the invasive species if it does if the seed does manifest itself why do you need to worry so much about the seeds you don't I mean you can bring still into a project separate apart from developing it for some purpose so that so there's no other you know site plan being submitted to something right I mean I could be stupid on this another facts but if that situation have independently of any other kind of plan being done you would want to catch that there's no then trigger to go clean it up this whole thing is application driven well okay okay so did we amend the fill permit section to includ this not sure I just I've only seen Che one needs to get a fill permit in order to fill all right if that's all you're doing is filling and then there's a fine line between what becomes a mass grading permit and a preliminary development plan and a fill permit and that's kind of at the discretion of the staff um but I mean I can assure you I'll give you pw's number and you can call them and they're not going to be able to tell you whether there are any noxious weed seeds in their fill dirt that they just bought off my site well but I guess the question require to your point Elizabeth is there a way to trigger the invasive species management plan once you bring the fill in that's what that section was doing I thought I thought that was independent any other application I don't think that's the way it reads though I and I should have brought this up when we met last week but it it doesn't read that way to me and to John's point there is you know clean fill is kind of chemically clean fill there is no test that I'm aware of right this just says fill materials shall be free of seeds and viable parts of invasive plant species declared by the current Fisk invasive plant list there's no way no known way or known practical way to do that and if you to screen that fill material down to that level to try to get those seeds out of I mean the cost I go through the number 200 well that's why I asked is there way to to instead of putting that provision in million a fill in it's going to be 4 million just require the just require the invasive species management plan as a condition of the fill permit so one of the things David we discussed when I met with them all right and what I would tell you in general I said there's a fine line between a mass grading permit a preliminary development plan and a Phil permit Phil permit is David Goldstein has a low spot in David's backyard that holds water that he doesn't like it and he needs to put more than five yards of dirt in there to fill it and he comes in down at the vill building department and applies for a fill permit it gets routed through Brad's Department I want to go take down a 12T Hill to build a future boat in RV storage that's a mass grading permit or a preliminary development plan the point being Phill permits are generally mom and pop permits and do we want to one of the things that I was insistent about when I met with staff is that we make some kind of exemption for the little guy in here because to prepare one of the plans as proposed the invasive species inventory and then management plan is an unreasonable financial burden on most homeowners in this County let alone them being able to even find the professional to do it and I know that just from the world of things like you know you got they require a grading plan for a swimming pool do you know how many people call my office crying that they've called every engineer in town and nobody will take their job to prepare the grading plan well this going to be the same thing there's a limited pool of biologists and environmental scientists out there and they're not going to come out and prepare this massive plan especially in the detail that's specified later on in this thing to that you know Mom and Pop can't afford that it actually is not that hard I said landscape architect I seen many other projects and maybe not in this state where the engineer actually does the specs and as they're doing the clean field you know most of the plants they grow on the top layers and most of the field comes down from the bottom layers the bottom layers doesn't have a lot of these seeds they have a lot of these Romas so they can be those some of those elements that you know we're talking about that can be incorporated in the development review manual Roberto just from my from my perspective and just again yeah go ahead sorry I thought you were done and so um in addition to the field permit the field permit is not necessarily only for filling up your backyard but it also has other elements like the flood plane elements that you're going to ensure that it doesn't do all that so there's a lot of more review that goes into the Min to the field permits so with those things in mind I think that the elements on the development review manual can address what you're talking about you know we just I'll give you an example just before being appointed to this seat I was working on the flood plane management ordinance and one of the things that's included in our flood plane management ordinance is that if you're in zone V is to do a wave runup analysis and I harped and hemmed and back then that you can put this in the ordinance but there's nobody around here that knows how to do a wave runup analysis and there still isn't and I was just involved with one where the applicant rather well-known applicant on her property got a proposal for $40,000 to do a wave runup analysis for her seaw wall that's what I see happening here that is not a reasonable burden to put on the average citizen I understand when we're talking about the big developers you know the lenars and the Dr Hortons and the KB Homes of the world they can probably absorb some of these costs but think about what would happen if I all of a sudden saddled you with that burden for something that you you needed to do well a landscaper can do all these analysis and as they're throwing down the dirt they can see that there's no Romas there's no see this clean feel you don't you don't need with all due respect I'm I'm an avid Gardener okay I have a garden and a ryome that is the most miserable I have two ryes in my garden and most people have them in their yard that are the most miserable things to deal with are penny wart dollar weed and nut Edge and you can go pull nuts Edge and if a piece this long is left in the ground that will grow back and I have dug and dug and dug and dug and burned you should see I have this flamethrower at home to try to burn out nut you can't you can I can burn the the green part off the top but if any of that ryome is left in that soil it's right back a week later I mean and you can't I can dig up in that sand and you can't see every little piece of Rise that's an impossibility that's not practical yeah I I was just going to say I mean I I understand the intent of the ordinance and where things are trying to go and the direction you guys have been given I just how how does this get enforced how does it I mean just the reporting how how many of these applications did the development review Department get this year whatever that number is multiply it by two because that's how many different reports you're going to get over the next year for all these studies that are going to come in because they're required every six months I mean the amount of reporting the amount of Burden you're putting on the applicant I mean to me this just seems like it's way over and above what what the intent is of of the direction you guys have been given no problem and and I think I told you when I met with you if you get a plan from 2gh Solutions and we've got a clearing plan or a demolition plan there's a note on every one of our plans and it's not necessarily required by County but it's our standard practice you're going to remove any exotic and nuisance species right that's that's a common thing and I would tell you the penis County requires that and Hillsboro County requires that and the applicants generally do that I've got a site right now that's under construction that was probably covered 90% in kogan Grass before we cleared it and I would also tell you that just by clearing and grubbing and the construction activity that that kogan grass is gone and after we pave the place it ain't coming back but right I think a lot of this it's interesting because the construction activity itself when we're clearing and grubbing a site we're going to strip off the top six Ines of soil anyways that's where that ryome is and you know I was looking at kogan grass management plans when in doing research for this ordinance and they'll recommend discing the soils at least 6 Ines deep well that's a standard practice we strip the top six Ines off anyways does that mean kogan grass can't grow back or won't grow back no no but at the end of the day it's a lot less of a problem after the development than it probably was before the development true but I'm with Jamie I mean the reporting requirement that's proposed at the end of this memo who's going to do all that you guys are going to have to create a separate department just to receive review and file you know and I deal with this with the Water Management District dist when you build a storm water Pond it comes with a condition that you've got to get a professional engineer to come inspect this Pond every two years if it's a wet pond with a filter every five years if it's a dry Pond and I would tell you in the old days it just just used to be a standard every two years well the district can't even keep up it's issued so many thousands of permits over its history that it cannot possibly keep up with these engineer inspection every two years I get people call me they're all freaked out cuz they got a letter from the Water Management District that their inspection is due and they're going to get in trouble if they don't get the inspection in by the deadline and we just sit there and laugh I'm like you cannot do this for the next 10 years and you're never going to hear from them because they got 10,000 others just like you and a stack and that's what's going to happen to you so well can I just let me just I had a question for John what is the purpose of the reporting because if it's an enforcement tool couldn't you just I mean invasives are sort of you can see them with a naked eye right as long as they grow so why couldn't it be enforced like any other Land Development code requirement that if they're if you actually see invasives growing they've overtaken the site or whatever then you call out code they site them for violating the management plan what is the benefit of all the reporting why not just enforce like we would any other land of code provision David the reporting requirement did not come from those of us here it came from natural lands and they're the ones who are going to be receiving the reports and doing the monitoring they have a representative available that I think should probably be answering these questions and and just before he before he uh he says anything just the the good news is that we're not adopting the reporting that reporting is on the development review standards which can be changed at any time we're not adopting the I know I understand that but although I do have one question about what you are adopting but as it relates to enforcement but whose idea was it to do require reporting resources my question is why can't you just rely on our normal enforcement process instead of requiring all this reporting I understand that you can't answer but maybe somebody can so okay there we go I think he's unmuting himself it's Matthew Hudson huder on the line yes hello Matthew Hunsinger from natural resources how's it going good so Melissa sharino the natural resources manager she's unable to be here today um but I can definitely take these questions to our staff and we can get back to you okay so did you hear the questions Matt I did I have them all written down yes sir so I have a somewhat related question which does go to what is being adopted which is how is enforcement handled on a typical residential subdivision in other words there's language at the beginning that says that the the the plan is basically I'm going to use the exact phrase that you all use me find it it says that it has to be it says ongoing maintenance monitoring the invasive management plan should be managed and perpetuated by the HOA CD property owner applicable entity or assigned responsible party on those lands owned or directed controll by the HOA CDD property owner Etc my question is in a typical residential subdivision if you see invasive species growing on a residential lot are you citing the HOA or are you citing the lot owner this doesn't go to that kind of enforcement at all um the way that it's written is that it's for all new projects going forward it's not retroactive there's really no way to make it retro act since it's application I'm only talking a perspective a new brand new residential sub no this this we're not looking at homeowners at all because they they they're not going to have the not going to have those contracts with the landscapers and so forth that all of our cdds and HOAs have that not all of them some have varying grades of talent in their in their salting contracts but that is going forward on those tracks that are then conveyed to the HOA or the CDD as an ongoing requirement of those entities that take ownership of that after the development developer is gone and done individual homeowners aren't included in this at all one of the things he wanted to avoid happening was an HOA going rogue and going after homeowners that have Lantana in their planting beds or lyro which is now be an a listed species I guess well so what in here makes it clear that that's only HOA or CDD property so the language David just read well it's kind of broad I'm not sure I read it that narrowly me either there's a declaration that gets recorded over the property and I make the the presumption that this invasive management species plan is going to be applied over the property of which the individual lots are part of do you want to I the problem is it it says property owner in that list which in my opinion could be construed to mean the lot owner okay we can fix that um could you put up the development um review manual guidelines for the enfor not not enforcement but the guidelines that were created by natural lands to assist with how this is implemented there's a attachment three okay thank you yet there's a provision there about this very thing so let's take a look at that while they're pulling that up John on on like Swift Mud looking at retention bonds and stuff does Swift Mud require look looking at invasive species is that part of that inspection tell question that you were going to impact a wetland or you were going to enhance a buffer and that was part of your mitigation strategy or agreement with the district that that would be a condition that you would remove these Exotics and invasives and I would tell you that generally if one was creating wet most people don't create Wetlands today they'll go and buy credits in the mitigation Bank in the old days when you created Wetlands then they would have maintenance and monitoring Provisions that you'll go in and you know inspect this and keep the Brazilian pepper out and the you know Peruvian Primrose Willow and that kind of [Music] thing so I think Elizabeth part of the issue is I think I know why you have that in there because there are probably some commercial sites that don't have an HOA CD so that the all the common areas are being maintained by the commercial lot owner to me if if your intent is to not subject individual residential lots to this ongoing requirement I think you just need to come out and say it that individual residential lots are not subject to enforcement of this require or whatever I mean my other slight concern is if the management plan might just say in theory you all somebody could submit a management plan saying the individual residential lot owners are responsible for controlling and that probably needs to be clarified in what the requirements is for you submitting that maintenance plan and who you have to identify in a restrictive covenant or some something who's going to be doing this after you the developer walks away just like you do with your restrictive covenants but you're telling me the intent is only for or common areas under the control of an HOA CDD or some other common maintenance entity yeah yeah absolutely so Mr Moody owns a residential lot in a subdivision and allows a bunch of invasive species to grow his lot nobody's going to site him is that what you're telling me that that's the intent because we do know that folks are planning things in their landscape beds that are invasive we don't want homeowners going after each other and so forth that's the wrong one guys it's the other attachment M management planing guidelines identify the successors and ass signs if known how would they be known well typically on an MP we require common areas to they have to identify who the common me insanity is going to be understand um but to me this wasn't when I read it it wasn't clear that you were attempting to exempt individual residential lot owners I don't see anything in there that clearly says that and can it be made clear that the Declaration a developer records a declaration over the entire property sometimes those declarations contain architectural restrictions lawn maintenance restrictions so on and so forth that it is not not a requirement that the Declaration include this invasive species management plan and what I'm concerned about is on the current proposed list in the category 2 species I quickly check today before I came in I can go down to Home Depot and Lowe's right up the road here and queen palms and elephant ears are on sale in the nursery today as his Lantana yes as his Lantana which we had a lengthy discussion that's because they haven't read this [Laughter] yet well David that's an easy fix I mean we can simply say it doesn't apply to residential lots whatever I mean in the whole thing like I said this is application driven the individual property owner is the one who's not applying for the management plan so the idea was that if you are having to do this step then it's your responsibility going forward but I can see how there could be confusion as the management plan encompassed individual residential lots right fix that do we need to take a public yeah is there any other questions for Berto or and those um the category two species why are we listing Category 2 species when you're even your own document says these species these have increased in abundance or frequency but have not yet altered Florida plant communities to the extent shown by category one species these species may become category one if ecological damage is demonstrated so why if there's been no ecological damage demonstrated why are we after these things today and I look at this just a simple analogy this is basically saying these species may become a problem well your dog may bite somebody but that doesn't mean we put your dog down today and so I don't understand and especially when these things are on sale at every nursery and you know like I said there there I checked the Home Depot and Lowe's website before I came in here today they're on sale up there today a lot of these things so I question why we need to I have no issue with the category one species but the category 2 seems like now we're really trying to stretch it that these are things that haven't become a problem that might become a problem there's we could make laws about things might do this and might do that and well I think that's a question that Matt should answer um but from what I understand from Melissa and Jackie who aren't here is why would you want to wait for it to become a problem when it has the potential to be a problem something along those lines because they haven't yet done the amount of damage that ones have but it's it's coming is what I understood um the items for sale and the lows and and and the Home Depots you can't use those as part of your landscape plan so you're a you're not going to have those purchased in fulfillment of the Land Development codes requirement for a landscape plan we're not able to of course to control individual homeowners do after they not planting according to a plan Elizabeth kind question I submit a landscape plan for a commercial site okay and I follow the ludicrous list that I SC walked about back in 200 four five or six or whatever it was we did the ludicrous list that makes me have eight different species when of trees when there weren't even eight different species of trees to begin on the site and now I'm planting cypress trees on top of Sand Hill so I can meet the species diversity requirement and maybe some of those things need to be Revisited someday but you plant the trees and the bushes on your commercial side and then one gets run over by a car it dies and the new manager of the restaurant or whatever for store he calls in the landscaping company and says hey plant something over here and they go get a queen palm or put in three queen palms cuz it counts as a shade tree I who nobody's going around after the fact a 20 years later hey you got a site plan approval back in 2004 and you said you were going to have three pal metal Palms here to account for your shry nobody goes back and looks to see if those are there in fact I see landscape all over the county that's not been maintained for its original installed condition so these things are going to happen people are going to plant these things especially if they're easily acquirable did did Matt want to respond to the question is he elevated so he can okay yes yeah we can certainly take a look at this at the list and the category VI I mean we have already narrowed down the list quite quite a lot based off of the last meeting so we can we can take a look at that so but didn't I understand that if if it becomes a problem it becomes a category one it gets moved off the category two and gets moved to category one and that what you said at the beginning goes back and forth depends on how uh they get assessed by Fisk sometimes they moved down sometimes they moved up okay sometimes they even get eliminated from the list so if you seem if that if if it gets moved to the category one then we worry about it right that's my point I don't know these species under category two are species that are seen in M could probably is are seen in Pasco is that the reason why they're I I don't I kind of agree I don't know why there's it was it was paired down to species that have been found in Pasco I believe is that correct Matt I believe Jackie said that is correct that is correct and also these category twos they may become category one but it's also site specific on how the layout op the site is and how they're actually taking into the site so site specifically it could take over and become a category one based off of with all due respect I owned a home and had three queen palms in my front yard and I can't think of one instance where another queen pal popped up out of the ground whereas the nutsedge in the yard spread like wild fire yeah I understand that like I said we can take a look at this list of that joh some is there any other questions for Roberto right now yeah okay thank you thanks let's Grill this guy Mr hob Mr chairman and blessed members of the Planning Commission Clark hobby uh Hobby and hobby PA 109 North bre Street I've been sworn although I don't think that matters for this hearing uh I just had a couple of comments and and again I'm not trying to get in staff's business on this kind of thing because they have a lot more expertise than I do but there are a couple things that uh hit me about this one is and I've heard commissioner starky talk at length about her recent fixation with trying to get rid of kogan grass and I just want our staff to know the folks who are here online I have clients and friends that have spent the better part of the last 10 years trying to do everything possible on their ranches to kill kogan grass spent in excess of $10,000 well more than that a year spraying it and we cannot find anything that eradicates it we have full-time employees spraying it and it comes back and it comes back and it comes back so I think we're asking our citizens HOAs cdds a bit much when to my knowledge no one has been able to find a way to kill kogan grass if we wanted to regulate kogan grass as an invasive species so that it were it was not encouraged in some way that's fine but to my knowledge nobody's been able to find a way to easily eradicate it so we need to be mindful of that and however you draft this if I'm wrong about that staff can can advise me but I would love to know what the answer is there cuz none of the folks who own a lot of land have been able to figure it out secondly I noticed I think one of the approvals that some of these things would apply to are I think it was Minds was listed in there I don't think we want to be talking about applying herbicides and pesticides near mines that usually have Open Water bodies in them and some of which are connected and Pierce the confining later so staff should probably think about that a little bit you have a limestone mine and you've pierced the confining later You' got to be really careful about the application of pesticides and herbicides in the loral zone so that you don't create a bigger problem with the surface water body or even worse the aquifer especially when you have a direct connection Connection in some of these areas and then lastly and I think uh Denise is probably more aware of this and David as well um when we we got to be precise about the areas that we're talking about when we say common areas or where the areas are that are to be maintained and the reason why is if you look at all of our muds and there's sections of the comp plan in the LDC that talk about creating uh and it's it's uses more than the word common areas there are requirements to have conservation EAS ments and set asdes on many many developments now and so when we come in for a conservation area in an area that's not to have any development we frequently have to record a conservation easement or there's a platted conservation easement but the developer in almost all of those scenarios is only doing that to prohibit development in the area and we're not going to have any ability to continuously into perpetuity maintain and take out all invasive species and one of which that that we ran into this uh you know like 18 months ago at some point staff started thinking that we were going to do that on two rivers and it would have required us literally it was probably 1,500 acres of land that we would have had to continuously maintain and remove invasives from where the only intent in the comp plan when we created these policies was just to ensure that there can never be development in the areas when they're outside the development proposed bubble areas so I would ask staff go back and be very careful where they're requiring the affirmative obligation to maintain these things and it can't just be in areas that are you know not going to be developed it's one thing if we're talking about a common area where somebody's driving in and we've got an entry Road and we're trying to create entry features where a CDD or HOA is likely a higher level of Maintenance but we're not going to maintain these areas that are in conservation easements in most cases we're just ensuring that there's no development there so I just want staff to be careful in the language that it's not accidentally triggering that kind of Maintenance thanks appreciate it Elizabeth I have one more question for you about the individual lot exception or the intent so I get why you don't want to apply it to individual Lots but what if the HOA say Mr Moody has his lot he starts he he builds a cog grass Farm on his lot so shouldn't the HOA have the ability to if they want to enforce on IND individual lock because otherwise his Cogan grass for might spread to common areas in the subdivision well I think that we're not and I don't know if we want to be in the business of compelling HOAs to go after their residents I mean that means seems like that's an HOA decision you don't have a problem with it with their architectural standards or the parking on the street I didn't write those so you meaning the County government well I mean I'm not okay I'm not suggesting that the HOAs should be required to go after Mr Moody what I'm saying is shouldn't they have the option if they want to yeah because that's a private DED restriction if they if they're worried that Mr Moody's kogan grass is going to spread to say he's his lot is right next to the common area and to Mr Hobby's point they're doing everything they can to get rid of the com kogan grass in their common area but they can't control it because Mr Moody has a kogan grass farm right next door I would think that the HOA should have the ability to take some enforcement action against Mr mood otherwise it's going to be impossible for them to keep the Florida Department Of Agricultural and consumer services has the ability to do that and I was actually going to bring that up here thank you because you can't Farm kogan grass that's against the law in the state for the list of plants there is a whole Florida Administrative Code section and I'm sorry because I didn't write it down before I came but you can quickly Google that fdax has a list of noxious weeds and plants species that are prohibited in this state to cultivate propagate and kogan grass is one of them why wrong with Brazilian pepper and a lot of the other things on the Fisk list I didn't make a big deal of it because our comprehensive plan says that we're going to use the Fisk list for identification of the species so but one can't Farm Cen grass and Moody does proudly lives in an area where there's no HOA and he will never live in an area where there is an ho he can grow a lot but he can't grow cocon grass John what was can we get rid of the nuts Edge though what you said that was Florida Department of a has the list you said yes if you and if if you if you just Google Florida Department of Agriculture noxious weed there's a there's a whole Florida Administrative Code section that lists those weeds okay thank you I was looking at the comp plan right here I have the provisions on inv of species removal and it actually references the Florida exotic pest plant Council list that's the F list okay that's the former name of the disc so all I was trying to say Elizabeth is if you're going to exempt the individual residential laws you need to put a carve out unless the HOA independently wants to take enforcement action against them I don't think they should be prohibited from stopping Mr Moody's cogress for one other thing I wanted to point out for for Clark is I brought up this meth had this methodology section put up here because the this is in the development review manual potentially the idea is that it's a sight by- sight decisionmaking process so if it's inappropriate to use those kind of chemicals near the water body hopefully staff will you know working with the applicant and putting this together say well wait a minute you don't want to use those chemicals okay thanks yeah that was actually that was what I was getting ready to say as well um that it's it's to do the plan the plan is site specific and uh you know we'll just direct them all to use commissioner Moody's flamethrower instead of chemicals those areas it's interesting because I read I did a whole bunch of reading about control of kogan grass and there's people that have tried burning it but the problem is is and kogan grass is I guess apparently very flammable but it doesn't burn the ryome underground so it immediately comes right back and I can tell you I have the same experience with nut Edge I can go through with the flamethrower and burn the tops off all I want is coming right back next week so that doesn't necessarily work but that's one of my concerns about this too is that we're trying to ask the private development community and I'm not saying we shouldn't ask them to try but we're trying to make it a impose a requirement upon them that 100 Years of science hasn't figured out how to get rid of and there from my reading and I'm by no means an expert on this but I saw there were two chemicals used in the treatment of kogan grass one was glyphosate which I'm sure if you watch the news and there's been multi-billion dollar lawsuits about its cancer causing properties okay and glyphosate cannot be sprayed anywhere near surface water and then the other one I'm going to mess this up a zimp upar or M mipar or something like that which is a broadspectrum herbicide that the overspray kills everything it touches so if you spray this stuff and it goes on an oak tree it kills the oak tree so we don't really have a lot of good answers to dealing with kogan grass and I I did read one thing that was very promising there's a lady in the Panhandle who uses pigs to put on the property and go root up the kogan grass and they've had some success with that but I don't think it's practical for us to put pigs down in the County's drainage ditches to see if they can root up the Cowan grass or in of marada for that matter you know I I heard commissioner starky talk about the kogan grass in front of marada last time when I was on the way to Dade City I saw it I can see it from 52 and it's sitting right there by the edge of the detention pond in the front what are those people to do they can't use these herbicides we got surface water there what is it we want them to do I guess they can go try to dig it up but even that that's proven that it'll come back unless you can get every bit of ryone I'm not saying they shouldn't try don't get me wrong but now we're looking at where you can potentially send code enforcement out there because they've got some kogan grass that like I said 100 Years of agricultural and biological and environmental science hasn't figured out how to get rid of and all of a sudden the private development Community is going to do it maybe I have one more question because I want to understand how this is going to work in the context of protected trees so if the kogan grass has overtaken trees that we want to retain or vegetation that we want to [Music] retain is it is part of the plan are they allowed to just clear-cut the entire site because they're getting rid of the invasive species can you repeat that let's just say that you've got a site where it's got a lot of invasive species mixed with trees that we want to protect as part of this plan are they allowed to just clearcut the site and not mitigate for the protected trees I'm just trying to understand how this works I mean is I wonder worried about an overreaction to this where somebody says fine I'll get rid of to the damn Cogan grass I'll just I'll dig up the entire site and you'll just have dirt in concrete I guess that's my concern is is there going to be an overreaction to this where we [Music] lose protected trees so this is something that is going to be looked at these plans uh get looked at by our natural resources team um they're going to look at each site independently and the combination of species that are there and the amount um and they're going to come up with a unique plan for each site or the applicant's going to come up with a unique plan and they're going to look at it and see if that's appropriate does our natural resources department have proven experience getting rid of kogan grass getting rid of Brazilian pepper because there's all kinds of like I said Clark mentioned his agricultural interests that can't figure out how to get rid of it their the University of Florida hasn't figured out how to get rid of it but our natural resources department knows because if they do they should go publish the answer for the rest of the country to figure this out too and I don't get me wrong I appreciate their they're wanting to try and I am willing to pass an ordinance or recommend passage of an ordinance that attempts to do what we can do but I think we have to have reasonable expectations when we do it and I just I just hate to see this idea you know we're putting a burden on an HOA in perpetuity we're talking about we could potentially call code enforcement out in fact I read the article in the newspaper in the Tampa Bay Times basically tells the public if you seek Hogan grass call the county to report it well okay so now who's going to go do what about that I mean we're still trying to fix potholes and storm water pipes that are clogged up and by the way just on the south side of the sheriff's Operation Center on the other side of this parking lot is a retention Pond that is infested with almost every one of these species on this list what are we doing about that let's clean up our own ACT first well Brad I'm so that's ultimately my fear though is even if it's not the developer let's just say it's the HOA say if there is kogan grass or something in a common area and we site them is the HOA going to come back and say fine I'm clear cutting the whole damn thing all those trees that you asked me to plant for for because I could see an HOA doing that it might be cheaper for them to clearcut the entire common area and just dig it all up then try to go through and remove the invasive so I'm I want trying to figure out is there something in here that prevents that from happening they approv landscape so the again it would be based on the plan that the HOA submits to uh natural resources if they submit hey we want to clearcut this entire thing I'm not going to speak for natural resources or their expertise it's just it's more than me uh but I would think that they would say that's excessive and we don't want you to do that based on the combination that you have we think that you should do this or this other thing um something along those lines I I I'm assuming that that's kind of what the intent is with the kind of the uniqueness of the plan for the site itself you know there may be people that want to come in and do certain things and yes while there's really no way to necessarily get rid of kogan grass there may be a way to deal with other Exotics that then won't perpetuate the Cogan grass there may be a way to kind of you know do something there I'm not sure but that those unique combinations of things are what the natural resources team is going to be looking at when people submit those plans and you would need a permit to remove those trees anyhow um especially if they're required plantings was part of the landscape plan I I I think that there's probably ways to catch that concern another thing that I told some of you Commissioners when we were had our one-on-one discussions that there is a reworking of the tree um ordinance I think he told you that John and there's some other ideas they have there about looking at tree stands instead of trees themselves and actually talking about retaining aing vegetation on site in those tree stands so this is going to definitely come up as a conversation I'm sure again in regards to invasives and those type of tree stands and areas okay I heard the presentation yesterday will'll save the comments on that for later but I just had a couple of general questions on on RightWay permits it sounds like everybody up here understood but I I didn't hear the presentation so is there a reason why rightaway permits are included in here the thinking behind that is that we have a lot of different entities that do pull RightWay use permits besides as a developer you've got utility companies and other folks that use our ride of way all the time um we're going through efforts to clean up our ride of ways through Public Works and the idea is that other folks working in the right of way is part of the Reclamation when they're done doing their work on our right of way to clean up inv bases if there are inves there as part of that Reclamation effort so that's kind of how that came up um the there out there filling Wetlands filling Wetlands to create staging areas as they go through and upgrade the power lines and power poles they're all of a sudden going to get rid of the kogan grass we can't even get them to follow the Wetland law the point is they're required to have a Reclamation plan for cleaning up work they've done in our right of way so the idea is having this as an additional requirement as part of that Reclamation effort and we've Exempted the single family home scenario um as an overburden to the single family homeowner that John was concerned about and um but leaving it there for other entities that are pulling those permits okay and just I I was just trying to picture that that example precisely of Duke and however many hundreds of permits they pull every year and all of a sudden they've got this reporting requirement and the onus and the burden it puts on them that's all I get the idea of what their response will be to you to about that too okay and probably one of the reasons for that is because there's no regulations that we have available to go after them right okay any other questions comments so where do we go from here is any motions I'm not sure where to go with this to be honest with you well staff is requesting that you kind it consistent with the comprehensive plan uh the there is a policy Series begin with objective con 1.8 elimination of exotic nuisance plant species that would be the portion of the comprehensive plan that this ldr is seeking to implement because I'm not comfortable with the fill and again my concern I I and to be honest I'm sorry I didn't try to come up with tightening of language to talk about just the project area versus the the example I use so I'm not necessarily comfortable with that either that's kind of where I'm at Chris I I see the good and I don't want I don't want to and I don't want to let Perfection become the enemy of good here either agree but I think it needs more work it needs more thought more polish again the intent is good I I get it my thinking is maybe to go back and rethink some things based on the discussions maybe Circle back with other professionals and stakeholders I mean I hear we're relying on the natural resource people but has anybody called in the environmental scientist Community to come in and look at this I bounced it off of one of the Consultants that we work with this week but I haven't bounced it off the others but maybe bring in some of those regular environmental Consultants that we see here for the wetlands and that kind of stuff to because they're the guys that are going to end up having to go out and create these plans because I'm not qualified to do it and I think you should get some feedback from them as to what is practical what's cost effective and then think about some of the questions that David's asked from legal perspective and then maybe bring it back yeah I mean I personally I understand the good and I see the good in in portions of this ordinance I just I'm I'm just concerned about the the the burden and even the enforceability and even the can can anybody even abide by this and meet this and that's what I'm getting at Jamie too I think they need to rethink some of that stuff so Roberto or Elizabeth obviously there were some question questions asked of natural resources that they were not able to answer if this got continued for I guess my question is if this got continued how long would it need to be continued for so we can get answers to some of those things I don't I don't know what the agenda timeline and deadlines and stuff like that are for us so I don't know realistically how much time there is actually to get work done between meting I don't know so question back to the comp plan I quickly before I came to the meeting today went through the comp plan and I saw we had a whole section is there something is there Elizabeth is there language in the comp plan today that would allow Brad and Roberto to amend the development manual to perhaps require like for inance in if I submit a site plan you've got these Pasco County standard site plan notes you know that at least could start with you've got a requirement to remove and dispose of exotic and nuisance species on the Fisk category whatever list and that at least could do something today while we work out the bugs so we can we can do that anyway I believe through the the basic language I don't think there's any language that would prohibit us from doing that in the comp plan um the language speaks to removal of invasive species so we can do it by a condition of approval on those plans I wouldn't be opposed to something like that we could start with something like that and look at those as a way as a way to start and then you know see if we can get some improvement based on that and then come back if you know we start with the hatchet and then if we need the ax lator come back with that I don't know but at least you could do something today I think go ahead and continue this and that would be probably my thinking on this is to continue it but at least you've got some tool that you could start using tomorrow toward furthering your goal and I can appreciate the goal so so just to clarify the the suggested condition would be uh to put the list of those invasive species in the development manual with the the statement that you will you know the condition of approval would be you'll need to remove these from your site but it will not have the plan or the means or any of this other information in there you just want the basic okay it's more than there is today right yeah we we can do that at least the category ones right yeah yeah I would i' so we can we can start doing that being 100% support and I would be I would say that you're in line with the surrounding counties and that they they require that penel County requires that and natural resources does get those plans generally most of them that would come through um so they would be able to see that and and then comment further if they wish and I'm not suggesting that we necessarily throw away the ordinance but then you kind of circle back go out to the to me I hate to see this rush through you get you guys in my opinion you need to sit down with Clark and barbar's clients this affects them uh you need to sit with the environmental science community and kind of get an idea from them as to what they think is practical and achievable and then take all that into consideration and come back but at least you'd have a tool to start with today anything else I think the only thing that might not cover though is Brad do not is issue right away use permits right no I do not but uh we my team does review them so our Tech Team reviewer we could add that um you can can you recommend to public we can recommend that yeah and then to be clear to amend your development manual you still to at least publish the amendment on your the website I think is what we put yeah it's published yeah supposed to be if our website's working well I still think even if prad tends to do that in the inter you still have to decide what you're doing with this ordinance are you well what I'm trying to do is this I think this needs work based on the discussion we've had today I'm not saying it's all bad it just needs some work it needs some Polish it needs some more thought about some of the questions you've raised and that other on the board today have raised and so my thinking would be to continue this for a month or two months or three months or whatever it may be to allow the Polish to happen but still leave these guys with some tool that they can start doing today I think commissioner starky I've heard of three or four meetings in a row squawking about the Cogan grass so at least you know she knows you're doing something I think as a start we would like to be able to have this effective prior to October 1 well so let me exp Elizabeth I I hear you can I explain why please I understand why okay okay and I'm and I'm going to tell you that personally I'm politically opposed to that the legislature wants you to provide a business or economic impact analysis for exactly this reason you're this ordinance is going out and it's creating a burden on the private sector that's going to cost them money this is exactly why the legislature the governor signed that bill these things do have an impact and you're I mean basically you're saying is well here I want to ram rod this through so I can drive the impact before we actually have to disclose to the public what this is going to cost them that's not right but that's why and you know I hear it all the time I've heard David say sometime the legislature preempts us well it's because of that kind of behavior that's why the legislature comes in and preempts us we need to be careful of what we do and I'm not proposing to push this back to October I'm just citing for that reason I'm personally politically opposed and I think we need to be real careful about doing things that get the ey of the legislature and that's one of them okay so I asked a question earlier which is how long will natural resources need to answer some of the questions that were I mean Elizabeth I know you're perfectly capable of drafting some of the legal stuff in a week if you needed to but I don't know if natural we heard briefly from natural resources that they would take some of the stuff back and discuss it but I never heard how long it would take them to get answered I mean one of the biggest concerns I heard was the reporting requirement so I haven't even heard from natural resources what they're going to do with these reports or why can't they can't enforce other means so how long will take them to get answers to these things mat are you still on I would say 60 days to be fair so because I cannot speak for a manager who is not here but I would say 60 days to at least answer some of these questions yeah I was going to say it probably shouldn't take too long I I did raise the the kind of a resource burden that this might bring to them and so they're they're aware of it and they they said that they felt that they had a way to deal with that so we don't know what that is because the right right people aren't on the call necessarily Matt Matt does for them 60 days and came back to the Planning Commission and the hypothetically the Planning Commission recommends approval and it goes on to the board does that still have leave time to get it to the board before October 1st I have absolutely no idea I don't know the time frames for deadlines maybe Patty would know better I don't live in that that world of having to schedule out mon in advance to make a deadline for M for a memo didn't the presentation already have scheduled for two meetings in June so it's GNA I can answer the question I there you go okay sorry all right so um so you need 60 days so I would imagine that we would not be able to get anything to you by July 25th which is kind of sort of 60 days from now um so this can go to the Planning Commission meeting on August 8th um may I may I'm sorry we can have the questions answered as soon as possible as you need them we can get it to the next meeting I don't think we need the 60 days okay so the next meeting is June 20th Planning Commission okay we can do that so that's a basically a 30-day continuance pretty much but let me just ask the question and yes that you can get through the board meting if it was if it was July could you still make the get two board meetings before October 1 that's correct yes okay so June 20th is not going to work for us so um if we can continue it to July 11th LPA we're I think the I think where we're headed of course I'm talking I hear a couple that might support me assuming there's a vote for a continuance we're trying to accommodate you not necessarily us so if the July date I that's fine with me July 11th at 1:30 in dat City and Denise on July 11th can we make sure the natural resources either here in person or available to actually answer questions because I I'm no offense to Matt but he wasn't really the person to answer some of these questions yeah preferably in person yes so noted I will send messages and I'm sure Matt is probably doing that right as right now as well okay uh there's a motion to continue this I think John is it did was it made was that Mo motion made or no I'm sorry I haven't made it we were trying to figure out the mechanics if it were to be made sorry sorry for jumping the gun there no yet 11th July July 11th 1:30 dat city so we didn't hear the whispering but Roberto you're fine with July 11th Roberto 711 yep 711 is what we'll shoot for okay oh that was a bad joke Brad I hope that wasn't a joke then I would move to continue this matter until the July 11th LPA meeting in D City I'll second all right a motion and a second any other discussion okay all in favor say your motion include a request I realize you can't mandate it but a request that development review what is your department of call down bro Brad's departmentment we're still get uh development review Department the development review Department begin some implementation of space invasive species conditions and Publishing the list in the development review manual so it's really publishing a list uh in the development review manual uh natural resources has actually been adding a generic condition in this regard anyway so really the change is to add this to the to the manual yeah need our permission for that I can do that don't need it all just tell me sounds like you're going to do it anyway sure good okay but if you want it as a site plan note will you please put it on the website so we all know we don't have to get it as a comment we'll just put it on there John's still hoping for that one review that it comes back is approved the first time been trying we will uh we will make those recommendations and and and talk to Folks at the preat meetings about that so hopefully it's it's done ahead of time we can't make it a requirement of the site plan submitt because that's actually a code element so okay gotcha all right any other discussion all right all in favor opposed motion carries thank you thank you anything else Denise you can beat your 445 deadline that's right I can make it right motion to adjourn so move second right motion to Second all in favor I closed meetings adjourned [Music]