Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Development Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission pauses rewrite of land‑development code changes after wide debate on wooden bridges, street trees and construction traffic
Summary
Pasco County staff presented proposed LDC amendments addressing construction traffic routing, a ban on new wooden bridges on county roadways, and new street‑tree and landscaping rules; commissioners asked for refinements and voted to continue the item for further review and workshop.
Get email alerts on the Land Development Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pasco County staff presented a package of proposed Land Development Code amendments aimed at construction traffic routing, prohibiting new wooden bridges on county roadways, and strengthening landscaping and street‑tree requirements. Tammy Snyder (Planning) said the construction‑traffic language would encourage use of arterial or collector routes and avoid staging and debris on local roads; she described enforcement options including stop‑work orders and requiring off‑duty law enforcement to manage heavy trucks.
The proposed wooden‑bridge language would prohibit new wooden bridges on county roadways but allow privately owned roadways and subject to an alternative‑standards process; staff and commissioners debated the rationale, maintenance and O&M implications for homeowners’ associations and community development districts (CDDs). Planning director David Engel and staff described recurring maintenance complaints from some CDDs where developers installed timber bridges and later homeowners objected to upkeep. Commissioners pressed staff to explain why bridges were singled out and to ensure the rule would not unintentionally penalize historic or privately maintained features.
The landscaping changes would make street trees mandatory for residential streets and revise tables for required shade and understory planting; commissioners raised equity and cost concerns for small businesses and civic groups and questioned how to apply the value‑based trigger for retrofit landscaping on sites adding new buildings. Patrick (staff) suggested removing a problematic “value‑based” clause and returning with clearer guidance. After extensive discussion and public comment, commissioners voted to continue the ordinance and schedule further review/workshop; motion carried by voice vote.

