Public Utilities

Last Updated May 2021

Developments of 100 Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs) or more require public water, sewer and (if available) reuse water (Comprehensive Plan policy WAT 1.1.4, table 10-1A). There are no available public utilities in the adjacent neighborhoods per County Utility staff. Connections will have to be made at SR54 and Old Pasco Road or SR52. It depends on capacity availability and size requirements.

Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan (FLU 3.2.2.a) requires that private electrical utilities be installed underground and that they be located outside of sensitive land areas (FLU 3.2.2.c.a)

Existing rights of way are too narrow to provide required sections for utilities. This has been confirmed by a high ranking county staffer. A minimum of 15 feet of right-of-way (ROW) is needed to accommodate water, sewer and reuse pipes. Therefore, 60 feet of ROW width in Angus Valley and Quail Hollow is too narrow to add pipes to all the other required improvements. The developer’s Substandard Road Analysis and Access Management Analysis do NOT address this. Instead they repeatedly state that the existing ROW is sufficient for all needed upgrades.

There are problems: with this:

  1. Leaving this ROW discussion out of the analyses means any cost for upgrades will be underestimated, which means that the developer will be under assessed for his “fair share” leaving a much larger bill for the residents.
  2. Widening ROW in an established neighborhood means private property will have to be bought or taken along the road(s).
    1. A legitimate question to be answered would be, can the county take (eminent domain) property for the benefit of a single property owner?
    2. If taken after fair share has been determined as part of the required road improvements, residents will be assessed for any additional cost(s).
    3. Land Development Code 4.A.4 states that a property owner cannot be unreasonably burdened such that [he] will “bear a disproportionate share of the burden imposed for the good of the public, which in fairness should be borne by the public at large.” This statement implies that unneeded improvements in an established neighborhood are assumed to be “for the good of public” and [cost] “be borne by the public at large.”
  3. The majority of us are on well and septic. There is literally NO NEED for public utilities, so is it possible this could be construed as for the good of the public and the basis for eminent domain being used if more ROW were needed?
  4. The developer’s statement that they will bear the full cost of extending utilities into the neighborhood, does not address the issue of whether there’s enough ROW or lacking such, how sufficient ROW will be acquired. This needs to be addressed openly.
  5. In the developer’s community meeting on March 1, 2021, the project engineer mentioned that it is “most likely” that the utilities will be brought in from the south. That’s Dayflower in Angus Valley. No one addressed where the pipes will come from (what major hookup to the public system). Disruption to the community will be substantial, but none of that was addressed.

Does any of this make you want to comment to the appropriate people? Contact us and someone from the Quail Hollow Alliance will call you to help you do that.