Draft Pasco 2050 plan proposes new mixed‑use nodes and density tiers; commissioners question TDR and review changes

Pasco County planning staff presented a wide‑ranging draft of Pasco 2050 on May 27 that would reshape how the county assigns density and concentrates multifamily housing, and that would add new mixed‑use categories and a refined transportation vision.

Hyatt Misili and project staff summarized the effort as a 24‑year first general update of the county comprehensive plan intended to streamline policies and reduce frequent ad hoc amendments. The draft organizes the plan into 11 chapters and proposes a consolidated set of future‑land‑use categories intended to simplify decision‑making while adding tools to guide where denser housing should be built.

Key land‑use changes

Terry (planning staff) explained that the update consolidates multiple residential categories into a new ‘‘suburban density residential’’ (SDR) future‑land‑use category with a broad density range (about 2.8 to 17.9 dwelling units per acre) that will be divided into three tiers: Tier 1 (approx. 2.8–6 du/acre), Tier 2 (6.1–12 du/acre) and Tier 3 (12.1–18 du/acre). Urban density residential (UDR, roughly 18–64 du/acre) would be allowed only inside the county’s urban‑service area.

To concentrate multifamily in walkable locations, staff proposed three mixed‑use node types: Neighborhood Corners (6–11.9 du/acre), Community Squares (12–24 du/acre) and Urban Centers (18–64 du/acre). The draft pairs those nodes with density bonuses tied to on‑site affordable housing (staff cited a 20% affordable‑housing target at <80% AMI as a basis for bonus units) and with a targeted transfer‑of‑development‑rights (TDR) mechanism intended to let landowners in certain eastern rural sending areas sell entitlements to developers in receiving mixed‑use nodes on the west side.

Housing‑capacity studies and SDR compatibility

Staff proposed a new procedural safeguard: any future‑land‑use amendment or rezoning that seeks multifamily at 12 du/acre or greater would need a focused housing‑capacity study. That study would inventory vacant/underdeveloped parcels in nearby mixed‑use nodes, demonstrate whether those nodes can absorb demand, and analyze transit and mobility capacity. In addition, the comp plan would include objective compatibility criteria—building form, parking orientation, screening, stepbacks and vegetative buffers—that the land‑development code would later translate into prescriptive standards. Planners said those measures respond to state law changes and aim to give the board objective grounds to approve or deny projects.

TDR and controversy

The draft’s TDR element drew the most sustained critique. Commissioners worried the proposal would create a market that shifts density out of one area to another and that it could be used to move development away from rural communities rather than incentivize on‑site preservation. "If something's appropriate for the west side, why am I taking the east‑side part to make that happen?" one commissioner asked. Staff responded that TDR is voluntary, is being scoped to a specific East Market sending area, and is intended to make conservation more financially attractive for rural landowners.

State law and review thresholds

Commissioners also flagged recent state changes—staff and county counsel referenced HB399 and earlier SB180—as materially affecting local review. Staff said the adopted version of HB399 preempts certain discretionary bases for denial unless the county adopts objective, measurable standards; that is why the comp plan draft seeks to add objective compatibility criteria and to require binding concept plans at entitlement for higher‑density projects.

Next steps and public engagement

Staff said Pasco 2050 is on a path to transmittal and adoption in the fall; they will follow the comp‑plan work with targeted land‑development‑code updates to implement the new standards and will hold public workshops. Commissioners asked staff to provide a short legal memo summarizing SB180 and HB399 implications and to deliver clearer slide packets so board members can annotate material ahead of future hearings.

Sources: Pasco 2050 presentation and commissioner discussion at the May 27 BCC workshop (staff slides and spoken remarks).