1.10.2023 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

the Tampa Bay Times on October 9 2022. thank you Mr Peter thank you thank you Mr chairman uh item p55 is an ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a large-scale comprehensive plan Amendment to the Future land use map map 2-15 and sheet22 from res 3 residential three dwelling units per girls take or two about six residential 6-12 units per gross Shaker on approximately 61.04 Acres of real property located at East of bilmer Road north of Zephyrhills bypass and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repeal or super ability and effective date this comes with a recommendation for uh uh approval and this is the adoption hearing for this comprehensive plan Amendment there may have been just a clarification there may have been a technical glitch in which what was Illustrated in the agenda packet was a transmittal hearing agenda memo but as I'm checking the system right now it's it's showing us the adoption memo so we passed out and revised adoption most uh agenda hearing agenda member with the proper adoption motion okay that was a change of the revised Edition I'm sorry that was the change of the revised Edition that we just got well we provided it just in case uh the the glitch was persisting in the system but I I'm I'm bringing up the correct uh agenda memo off the website right now okay any more presentation we're going to hear from the applicant well it's an ordinance so normally it would be you'd have a stamp presentation okay right we can make a presentation foreign with long range planning bye-bye hi so today's project is um pdd220013 large-scale comprehensive plan Amendment cpal 2213 Hamilton Oaks it's the um ordinal voice red the property is located in the sales market area the proposed project about the village of Pasadena boph to the South BHM there is a general locations that's the project overview proposal large-scale comprehensive plan amendment I mean I mean Fisher line use map 215 and sheet 22. from residential three to residential six on approximately 61.04 Acres of real property located east of Wilmore Road and North of surfer Hill Bypass it's the address the resolution is to amend the flu map 2-15 and Sheet 22. um there is an Associated resounding petition on their RC 7669 Hamilton Oaks and PUD thank you um the following policies are consistent with the proposed comprehensive plan Amendment we got a site location of the subject property we got a visual roadmap of the surfer Hill Bypass your south of the proposed project here is a Suma version of the Bishop

when you have multiple ways to go you avoid the good one um to answer commissioner breath for a question yes so if your bike have uh bypass it's gonna be constructed all the way up to the project all right let me see up to this area right here and that surface here is a developer driven so it's going to be up to the project as so far the information that we have so to be to be clear about the answer about Zephyrhills bypass being constructed it's going to be instructed completely in front of the property the co-boundary typically the developments bring the road to the to just about their entrance so they can have access into the development maybe a little bit beyond it but not the entire link well but as far as their entire property lines should be covered in order for them to have access yeah so not only just the access coming in but to the end of the bolted property lines we should have that road there's a field bypass built why should we follow on the next person uh I think the the standard the typical practice has been that they build up to their access point and then the next development that comes along extends from that access point to the very next one so it moves along why why would I end it at their property line because it's excess Road that's not going to be used until the next development whenever it is comes in I know why should that follow on the next guy coming in should be everything in the front of that property should be taken care of I would think I think what Terry's trying to say is is that the next guy will take it to his entrance we're trying to avoid building excessive roads that we need to maintain and they also long stretches of dead end roads lead to problems such as illegal dumping and other problems that come with with things like that so it works out on the averages because you're building entrance to entrance and that's what that's what planning's policy is okay logical okay any questions for staff Mr chairman we do have the answer to your question okay 40s and 50s thank you we have a slight answer to your question um so the chapel Crossings which is abutting this property is currently planned or approved or being under the approval process for the 40 and 50 foot wide Lots Hamilton Oaks is envisioned to align with that which is why they're proposing the 50 foot wide Lots there is also currently an MPD to the north which is The Village's l m under review right now so we're also finding that information as well for you okay thank you any other questions for staff no the applicant

[Music] Barbara wilheit 63-27 Grand Boulevard Newport Richie for the applicant I don't have a lot to add to staff's presentation other than I would note that Chapel Crossing is approved for 40s and 50s they have a land use of res six which allows a maximum of six units per developer Laker and also RoR which allows a maximum of 24 units for developable acre to our South is Avalon West Somewhere Lots it's um it's a PD's plan development so it doesn't have a res category and we are coordinating with um to the north because Depew Ranch has plans in we are providing connections to our North and to our East our Southern connection will be to Zephyrhills bypass which we will continue we have a meeting on Thursday to talk about zephyrhill's bypass with your staff to talk about the issue that you're raising are we going to the driveway are we going to the end of our parcel so that's teed up for for Thursday we are working on the mpud and those are the details and that's why we have that meeting set up so we'll be discussing that with with the planning staff and there's a whole bunch of people in that meeting on Thursday so we'd ask for your support in transmitting the comp plan amendment is consistent with everything that's around it we know we got some questions and about zoning and lots sizes and all the things you've been discussing from the dice and we're keenly aware of that and we'll work with your staff and yourselves to make sure that you don't have any concerns as the MPD comes forward I do have a team if you have any other particular questions I have my team here foreign do you want to see more do you want to see more 40-foot Lots or do you want to commissioner this wouldn't be the time that you'd make that decision this is the comprehensive plan so as long as res six is appropriate for this area what size Lots would be a decision of the zoning okay yeah I understand that that's uh then there's going to be more of her best forward than I'll read six so yeah I'm looking for approval all right so we're gonna have a public hearing okay there may not be anybody but you still have a problem here so this is the public hearing is anyone here in the audience would like to speak to this item do we have anybody on the WebEx we have no one on WebEx for this item okay so we'll close public comment the motion I moved for Approved okay second okay at a roll call vote do we have commissioner Weightman here this afternoon he was on earlier yes yep we cannot see but we can hear you okay now we see you all right Seth we can see you you need to go to bed back to Prime Time like magic okay so yes you'll need a roller covo okay district one commissioner Oakley District Two

commissioner Weightman I'll support this item today but I I really want to emphasize that being resulting here needs to be a high quality product and matching the single family residential standards so that complement I'll support it District 3 commissioner Starkey aye District 4 commissioner Bradford aye District 5 chairman Mariano hi yeah motion passes and item p56 has been withdrawn okay thank you Mr chairman item p-56 is a zoning amendment in the name of Apple Enterprises trust paulum adesi and Marie Clementi Stamper ttee catfish Townhomes it was a change in zoning from an AR agricultural residential district and R2 low density residential district between mf1 multiple family medium density District in South Central Pasco County at the northeast corner of Catfish Lake Road and Camp Indian Head Road on 16 and a half acres and the item was withdrawn look out for is with tried so we're going to proceed with the public hearings with the county attorney please review the procedures for resulting happy to as soon as I remember to bring it up there are two reasoning agendas regular and consent staff will present each application to the board of County Commissioners if staff or Planning Commission has recommended approval and there is no opposition to the application the application will be considered by the board without further presentation if staff or Planning Commission has recommended denial or if there is opposition to the application the applicant will be given five minutes for presentation the opposition will be given three minutes for each individual or five minutes for a group representative and the applicant will be given three minutes for rebuttal any individual disagreeing with staff or Planning Commission recommendation or anyone wishing to object to any condition of the rezoning May at this time request the petition be pulled from the consent agenda in which case that application will be heard under the regular agenda later on during the meeting otherwise I'll rezoning applications on the consent agenda will be approved by a single motion and vote if you wish to speak to any petition please give us your name address and whether or not you've been sworn for the record these are quasi-judicial public hearings law in Florida is the near public support or opposition of an application is insufficient for this board to take action please limit your comments to those criteria for rezoning found within the board's Land Development code thank you those who are in person who have pre-registered to speak or any to any of the items on the public hearing agenda will be sworn by the clerk now so anybody's going to speak to any agenda I'm coming up please rise okay if you're here to speak on any of the remaining items please stand and raise

your right hands do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you God thank you okay thank you today we have five public hearing items on the consent agenda p56 as we just said was withdrawn and we'll start with continuances start with P57 item P57 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on November 23 2022. item P57 is a zoning amendment to Angel's Senior Living mpud master plan unit development by ASL sr54 real estate LLC it's a resorting request from an AR agricultural residential district R4 high density residential district and C1 neighborhood commercial District to an MPD master plan your development District to allow the development of a maximum of 180 000 square feet of commercial at 181 thousand square feet of residential treatment and care facilities and approximately 31.77 Acres and the same is being continued we have a motion to continue P57 let's remove uh hold on a second time sir that's what I'm so this this is to be continued to the February 7th 2023 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1 30. at 1 pm or in Dade City good with the motion maker moved to time certain it's no February 7th maybe then we have a second okay roll call vote district one commissioner Oakley aye District 2 commissioner Weightman District 3 commissioner Starkey aye District 4 commissioner Bradford aye District 5 chairman Mariano aye item number p58 item p-58 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on November 23 2022. item p58 is a zoning amendment by Margie Tingley it's a change in zoning from a C3 commercial light manufacturing District to the C2 General commercial districts in central Pasco County on the south side of State Road 52 approximately half a mile east of Morata Boulevard containing approximately 9.82 Acres and this is requested to be continued to the February 7 2023 BCC meeting in Dade City at 1 30 as well okay my motion to continue to continue to February 7th 1 30 in the afternoon doing good second you have a second district one commissioner Oakley aye District 2 commissioner Weightman uh District 3 commissioner Starkey aye District 4 commissioner Bradford all right District Five chairman Mariano aye and now proceed with a consent item starting with p59 item p59 was published in Tampa Bay Times on November 23 2022. item p59 is a zoning Amendment High Ridge center Inc slash High Ridge Center Lots two and three it's a change in zoning from an i1 light Industrial Park District to a C2 General commercial District in West Central Pasco County on

the south side of Ridge Road approximately 280 feet east of Galen Wilson Boulevard uh containing approximately 3.47 acres and this came with comes with a recommendation of approval okay anyone here to object to this item so leave 50 P 5900 and there's no one on WebEx for this item okay so to p60 item p60 was published in Tampa Times on November 23 2022. I didn't p60 is the Snead family revocable living trust uh James and Adele e t t e e s slash Chancey Road it's a change in zoning from an AR agricultural residential district to an mf1 multiple family medium density District in southeast Pasco County on the Southeast corner of the intersection of Chancey Road and Diana Drive containing approximately 30.188 curse this comes with a recommendation of approval there is a correction in the commission District it's actually commission District One and also there was an expiry that was submitted on behalf of commissioner Oakley and then also there was a voluntary deed restriction recorded to be recorded for the for the project that was included in the in the agenda member okay is anyone in the audience or on WebEx in opposition item p60 there's no one signed up and no one on WebEx for this item okay item p61 item p-61 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on November 23 2022. item p-61 is the zoning Amendment Gateway Paschal Venture LLC it's a change in zoning from a C2 commercial and C3 commercial light manufacturing District to a C2 General commercial District in South Central County on the north side of Day flower Boulevard approximately 215 feet west of Oakley Boulevard containing approximately 4.71 acres and this comes with a recommendation for approval okay is there anyone in opposition to item 261 on in person or on WebEx I have no one signed up in person and WebEx for this item okay maybe 61 on consent p62 item p62 was published on Tampa Bay Times on November 23 2022. item p62 is Richard Rodriguez and Cynthia Cruz it's a change in zoning from an ar-1 agricultural residential district and RMH mobile home District through an r2mh rural density mobile home District in southeast Pasco County on the south side of Valley Brook Avenue approximately 345 West of South Brook Avenue containing 6 or 0.63 acre and this comes with a recommendation to approve okay thank you is anyone in the audience or on WebEx in opposition to p62 no one signed up for this other than no one on WebEx okay we'll leave that on consent item p63 item p63 was published in June 23 2022 item p63 is a conditional use request a Channelside mortgages LLC slash 8342 New York Avenue it's a conditional use for multiple family dwellings in a C2

General commercial District in Southwest Pasco County south side of New York south south side of New York Avenue approximately 525 feet east of Bagwell Road containing approximately 12.08 acres and this comes with a recommendation of approval with conditions okay and I am going to pull this item myself so I'm going to pull item 63 myself to not be unconscious so that'll leave all the other arms on consent kind of motion for the consent agenda I would approval all over that I'm some consent under second under discussion okay I wanted to go back to um the um one-on might be p60 what it's the one on Diana and Chancey 60 he's 60. and I just have a question for you guys and I think I brought this up on the movie Zone something around there so this is just North of Two Rivers is that right and and so part of the schools are between there and 56. I'm sorry I didn't I didn't hear your question I apologize commission this is just North of Two Rivers okay and when we approved Two Rivers I I had this question then before this was going to happen so um because none of these roads that I see coming south from Chansey um back then we're connecting to Two Rivers so are any of these Roads connecting to Two Rivers or is everyone going to have to go out and around through the intersection and down and back over to get to this place what is the connectivity plan for the area north this property is north of 56 and that's right right but the schools are north of 56. yeah but they're so how will the people's work of two boundary get to this uh if I could I'm going to pull this I'm going to pull it off consent we're just going to prepare a presentation on it okay all right so you're pulling that for now so that would be so p60 so the motion maker okay with 60 and and 63 are not on consent everything else is part of your motion I'm good with that the second degrees okay okay all in favor of consensus say aye um district one commissioner Oakley all right District Two commissioner Weightman uh District 3 commissioner Starkey aye District 4 commissioner Bradford aye District 5 chairman Mariano aye okay so let's go to p60 full presentation please okay thank you absolutely or do you want to just have the applicant answer the questions I want to understand what the connectivity is okay and then also at 56. sure and I also have transportation folks online who will

certainly be able to answer those questions if you could perhaps promote those okay good morning Ms Wilhite did you want to do a presentation on that or do you want to okay so we'll we're promoting some Transportation folks who should answer those questions and I'm not saying it's the responsibility of these guys to figure out connectivity I'm just asking what my staff is doing to make sure we do connect so people aren't having to drive miles to get it I I did see earlier on that there are at least three Transportation folks online so I'm not sure who would like to tackle that question purpose access um so usually in the site plans we usually ask for prop access so right now we probably haven't gotten to that point um but once we get to the site plan we usually ask for some type of connection so I will make a note to that so when we reach that I found it at the Cyclone well we will go ahead and uh look at the connectivity yeah that's not my my question is bigger than that my question is what is the plan for that area for connectivity not just this corner so thank you Mr chairman um the as I recall Two Rivers I believe the connection between State Route 56 and Chansey is via Coates road which is to the east Coates road which is a I would think it's about a block or two east of this site so there's only one road that will go north south from Mall between Chansey and two rivers uh well in this particular sector it's it's Coach Road I'm not mistaken so where's the school is it a coats and 56 yes and the park site is along those areas as well so as all this comes in maybe we have the ability to put in a trail or something that gets you know we have a vision for some kind of connectivity so kids can safely get to school without having to go out in a bus or have someone drive them around and so to be able to go east west on let's say the southern boundary of this apartment complex maybe it begins the conversation I just I just hope you have a great plan or something that's all yeah and and I believe Two Rivers uh handles that for its portions of the road segments that we're talking about yeah I just don't know what it is once you get past the two rivers border and all that's going to fill in and just be good if we had a plan of how kids you know we could get to how we could have north-south movement over the two rivers to border that's right on the trails plan it does have an East-West movement on Trails have East-West movement on 56 and on Chauncey so we can definitely take a look at um coats road is that that was fine if you remember when they put the schools on the north side of 56 which I thought

was a bad idea I think they moved to elementary school off of that um I always thought they should be South because everyone is now going to have to be bust because you can't because it's not safe kids to cross state road 56 but they said oh no we're going to put it on the north side of 56 and all those people to the north are going to go to that that High School well we've got to make sure they have ways to get there besides one growth we've seen that what that does like River Ridge and other high schools I'm not against this result okay any other questions for staff you have a motion to approve second no no we have one yeah can we have a motion approved do we have a second second okay and welcome district one commissioner Oakley aye District Two commissioner Weightman District three commissioner well let me ask if it does prove out that the bottom part of this piece of property don't we got to finish the vote first no I'm not gonna step in our discussion right um you're not under discussion because this is zoning not Compass has to be done want some kind of some kind of along the bottom no this is a euclidean zoning and you can't condition it all right well then yes good try for commissioner Bradford yes District Five chairman Mariano aye all right motion passes all right item p63 item p63 oh no we did that one so sorry I already did the publication okay thank you so PD um p63 is PDD Denise Hernandez Planning and Development sorry p63 is PDD 22cu07 this is a conditional use for multiple family dwellings in C2 General commercial District the applicant is Channelside mortgages LLC 8342 Newark New York Avenue the parcel property is located in uh Northwest Pasco County on the south side of New York Avenue approximately 525 feet east of Diagonal Road the this consists of of two pieces of property that are approximately 12.08 Acres they're currently Zone C2 uh General commercial District um the future land use on these Parcels is RoR retail office residential which would allow for a mixture of uses of retail office and residential the current zoning surrounding the parcels is C2 to the north AR to the north C2 to the west and C2 to the East and R1 to the the South R2 I apologize low density residential district to the South the parcel is vacant uh they're looking for multi-family dwellings to um to to develop the property with a total of 84 town homes in conformance with mf1 and I've already stated those things this is the proposed concept plan for the property and this comes through the recommendation of approval with conditions as stated in your agenda

packet from the planning and development department and the Planning Commission the Planning Commission did add a condition um condition number two which states that because the zoning stays as C2 the Planning Commission wanted to make sure that if it's going to be developed both commercially and residentially that the commercial uses are in accordance with C1 not C2 because there are more C1 uses are more compatible with residential as opposed to C2 uses that have some uses that could be obtrusive or obstructive to the neighborhood here with any questions all right thank you so the reason I pulled it and we did we we did make an exception for where we could have multi-family in a C2 District but if you look at what's around there on just the land use map can you pull that one on first absolutely doesn't appear to go be going backward for me I apologize so the CT all our C2 all around it to the to the east and west there's one little piece to the AR but that's just the side there's actually a C3 that's above it as well there could be more heavier industrial coming on both sides of these properties coming in um and just as Denise had just said they're careful as the Planning Commission wanted to make it C1 because of C2 could be obtrusive to residential development is exactly why I don't want to see a multi-family development come into a C2 area so that's why I've pulled it and that's why I um I don't support it what is that lack of this to the west of it is kind of is um it's a tire service I believe it's called Black Dog tire service and then there's also truck parking on the property what kind of Zone is trafficking well it's C2 General commercial District so I believe that what may have happened is that this existed prior to when we did the self storage facility type of use standards so it's just truck parking on the property that's been there for quite some time and then there may be a commercial Development coming into that site very shortly a commercial Development coming to that site shortly so again so again just the fit between multi-family I'm glad we gave ourselves the option to look at conditional use in a C2 zoning but this is I don't think it's appropriate place for it well you've got you've got it to the right and you've got it you've got it all along diagonal um is the whole property going to be um housing or the front still what they're proposing is this is their concept plan so they're showing 84 townhome units and some storm water and retention along the back so what they're proposing is all of it to be town homes Mr chairman commission Weightman

thank you [Music] very well and you know this woman is a job creations uh section this is a reflection for staff that's where it goes through the the president that these changes but the domino effect one thing to do another in our job creating problem we started off against something else so um sure um and thank you for the question I think um what we look at with something like this because it's RoR retail office residential there has to be a mix of those uses within the RoR section this was brought through it's in your finding a fact number 11 it was submitted to long-range planning for comments as to whether this would be okay within RoR and they said that per certain policies that they called out that it would be acceptable for 84 townhome units this is a little different than the calm which really is mostly commercial is commercial um uses RoR allows a a mixture of uses within the RoR segment so it's called retail office and residential but I've always seen residential on this plane correct within the segment so let me see if I can pull the segment so I can show you no you're fine I'm not sure if you can see the RoR all those areas within that red that entire section is the RoR segment so the parcel to the wet the two two one two three four five and then even going Beyond Diagonal Road those are all RoR retail office residential the parcels to the East and then going even east of um of Utica Drive all of those are within RoR so they so the folks in long-range planning and if if I'm Miss speaking please jump in but I did also work in long-range planning what they look at is they look at the segment of the retail office residential to see that there are mixture of retail office residential uses so in late in terms I'm seeing that from Diagonal Road to the west and going to East in this this photo that and during all of this would become residential demos not necessarily there has to be that mixture there's like a zero to 75 percent of retail office or residential so retail being commercial so when they looked at the existing zoning they saw that the uses there out there are as you can see mostly commercial I know there are a good bit of parcels that are vacant let me see if I could pull the aerial their aerial is shown here and you'll see a lot of these many of these properties particularly to the East are vacant um Parcels to the South have one single family dwelling on them for example I'm sorry to the north I apologize that are within that that segment as well and then you've got multi-family to the

east of Utica Drive which is I think it's Pasco Housing Authority owned and that's also within I believe it's also within the C2 District no it's actually mf1 how many units you know cut off the top of my head it's a very old development I can check the I can check the parcel cards because it's it's quite old and while she's looking at that slide if you take a look right above even where that is right to the north of it you've got i1 I2 then down the road is where the that Industrial Park I mentioned earlier today it's at the end of New York Avenue to talk about putting a signal at New York and Hicks so big trucks of me coming down there it could be another good opportunity for some more good commercial coming in there and again we're supposed to be creating jobs wherever we can Hudson needs more jobs so it's putting more multi-family in um Mr chair while I looked that up the the applicant has stated that he would like to sure and let's run the applicant I I haven't met with you haven't seen the project I just saw the item and I wanted to pull it so please your name address for the record Eric Lindsay 491 Pennsylvania Avenue Palm Harbor Florida um actually sorry our civil engineer and you've been sworn oh yes okay I think our civil engineer is also on um remotely and he said he needed to be unmuted so I think it'd be if he'd like to speak before for me if that's before sure Jesse black stocks thank you all right I think his um Mr blindstock you can go ahead and you should be able to speak now yes 146 West Snow Avenue Tampa Florida 33606 as Mr Lindsay was saying he is representing all right sir you also have to I'm sorry you have to also state that you've been sworn for the record have you been sorry yes I've been swollen for the record yes I've been on since all right now you may proceed thank you no problem yeah so as Mr Lindsay was saying he's representing the owner applicant and I am the consultant that's been working on this with Eric and the owners I guess the concern that I've got is understanding and I think the the long-range planning Place describing this pretty well it's in it's in an area where it's considered to be RoR so there's supposed to be a mix of uses not all commercial not all industrial I think our approach to this property potentially presented marketed as a and I want to say multi-family because that opens a door for what a traditional day like that's just basically to our East you know two Parcels over that's actually mf1 we're just looking to do Town Homes not actual apartment Garden style apartment so it's we've already kind of went on record and stated we would be amenable to that we are wanting to also leave the door open for them to be either visible or rental in that regard so we want that to be flexible as

well but we're just asking this as a conditional use not not particularly going to think about build town the applicants and owners of this property may not develop themselves they may develop them this this themselves they're just trying to utilize the line development code and get an approval for a conditional use uh being the key word as a traditional townhome development in addition to not in in not an exception to but in addition to the traditional C2 uses that are currently on property as part of the last hearing that we had she just got through telling or kind of covering this piece but we were amenable to lose lessening the intensity of the C2 demo CD model but as far as the concerns I guess Mr Eric Lindsey's been doing the commercial development probably for as long as I've been doing engineering for 25 years when you look at the traffic the annual daily traffic on a road like New York I understand zoning but no developers ever going to build a commercial development there because no developers are going to tended to be there you're not going to build a car wash for 2700 a day traffic it's just it's not on us 19. it's not on Little Road it's just not an amazing world that's a challenge and one of the reasons we were looking at trying to look at what other uses would be feasible if you will from a development standpoint and what would make sense to go there uh and I think that's probably why the RoR overlying our underlying land use is more of a mixed use concept area I get that we have industrial to our North and C2 to our to our East that needs to our West perspective it is a very deep and not a very wide Authority so I mean one of the things we've talked about internally is we would be potentially amenable to leaving sequel uses if that's the case for the last hearing up along New York Avenue with everything in the South potentially being a mix of uses in terms of account just from the traffic but I'm doing my best and did you have a question too you know what I what I could see here is something like what that company did on 54. and I'm not I know this is not State Road 54 but um offices like Warehouse offices I don't know what you call those where you build industrial buildings and people buy or rent a bay and they have a business I don't know what those called industrial warehouses could be a good use for that kind of layout but then if we change you to C1 then you can't do that right well they changed to C1 would only be you don't have C1 at rezoning the C1 in front of you right yes but that the C1 only comes into play if residential is developed so just for compatibility so if we decided to develop the entire parcel as C2 then it would be C2 the condition of C1 only came into play in the Planning Commission hearing as a

function of it being more compatible with the multi-family those C1 uses being more compatible with yeah if there was a residential I'll know I see that but I do think there could be a market for that kind of product if that's something you've built I don't know I do see you have trespassers all over that four-wheeling I guess so having someone develop that might put an end to that pain in the neck with only C2 around is not that big an issue I get plenty of other issues on other areas with the four wheelers but again this this as he says this is a multi-family resorting knot other options right yes for creating jobs I think we need to keep their job opportunity they had something else that they were bringing in specific but as they said they're just looking to get it rezoned to go flip it and put some multi-family in so I mean I am curious this is not a rezoning to multi-family this is a allowing multi-family nc2 which was the change the board of County Commissioners made um almost a year ago I thought we said if we do that you have to go vertical mix youth but if it's in the West Market area you don't have to do that specifically yeah yeah and to answer the question on the parcel um east of Utica it's 96 dwellings 96 multi-family units I'd rather take a chance on waiting for the some good ctus coming in um anything else sir I don't think that's anything else out of what Jesse said which was we'd be willing to work with the Staffing with you guys to add commercial along New York Avenue as a function of the development and put the the multi-family uses to approach the back of the parcel on yes sir go ahead um [Music] since this year this year and there seems to be a lot of commentary on so it's appropriate I apprecially continue the item once we have some clarity what type of clarity do you need we've got a C2 areas are surrounded by it these folks want to put in multi-family to it which would keep jobs from coming in again I hadn't met with the applicant before but literally when I saw it I just was I couldn't I could understand why staff did it but I wish staff would have probably come to me ahead of time to say let's go take a look at this because I never would have I would have coached them otherwise to come forward with this commentary so that's not withdrawal the motion Jack let me ask you um you're not okay because I would be okay with commercial up front it's and residential in the back but you're you wouldn't be I'd rather

cc2 you're going to have CTU uses all around it and like I said this I think there's some other property right decide if it's going to be coming in with something that's going to be a heavy duty commercial and the staff says heavy duty commercial is not compatible residential so why would I want to have homeowners in there get mad about jobs coming in so you're going to pull it I I pulled it now actually I would I would welcome a motion for denial you need to take public comment if there is okay all right anything else from the applicant no I guess I'm just curious that you mentioned a few times about an adjacent parcel that's coming online or are you referring to the parcel to the West to the West I mean we don't know if it's coming in yet so it's no exactly I spoke to that property owner actually he's he was actually interested in doing something um similar to what what we're proposing okay haven't heard that yet I've never made any new year I just have had that conversation with him okay all right this is a public hearing is anyone here to speak to this item I have no one signed up in person and no one on WebEx for this item okay okay back to the board I think it'd be wise for us to get more information on Commercial uses well I'm struggling here but I tell you I have a C2 coming to me that wants to be multi-family I don't agree with it it's on State Road 54 and I feel I need to be consistent although I mean I would have been I would have been okay for a mix on this one just because of its location but um would it be appropriate to continue this item time certain that we bring that I'd rather continue it and work with with you guys on it then didn't just try to force it through okay all right I'll be okay with that when you want to continue to make it time uncertain so you'll have time to look at it we'll have to re-advertise and that's but that's completely up to the board I was going to suggest over a month so February 21st Port Richey 1 30. okay I mean I don't know if you want to wait want to do March I'm good with that you do March well we could do March again one more time okay let's see what March is because my system just shut down on me of course that way we have a times certain and he doesn't have to re-advertise okay is that your motion here let me get through the day and I apologize it's coming the next BCC meeting is March 7th but it in days probably better for it to be on this side March 21st well let's let's get it to the other side yeah let's get it March 21st at 1 30 in Newport Richie okay when is it March 21 2023 Bridge New Port Richey that day okay so my motion

is to continue to March 21 at 1 30 in uh ubo Ritchie that was second test of a second okay and uh thank you for commissioner waiting for the leading the way all right a roll call vote district one commissioner Oakley all right District Two commissioner Weightman District 3 commissioner Starkey aye District 4 commissioner Bradford aye District Five chairman Mariana aye and item p-64 item P6 yes sir item p64 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on November 30th 2022 and December 7th 2022. my name is Joanne revita real property and planning real property team has received a petition to vacate a portion of three plotted right-of-ways filed by Blue Triton Brands Incorporated formerly Nestle Waters of North America the purpose of a vacation is to allow for the area to be utilized for parking and water retention to serve the expansion of petitioners existing plant there were no objections to this petition and the team recommends approval foreign this is the one that you had objections this morning in public comment and she did sign up for this afternoon okay um she did uh she had to leave by 2PM Okay so thank you so can I ask a question yes ma'am so did they buy all the houses around there no ma'am they own the property over which they are looking to vacate the area well I see yeah I see houses there so they're only they're looking to vacate the area in red oh okay are those right-of-ways being used now they are not yeah there's no Road there no there are no roads so and they they currently own all the property and so buffering between that House's border um right there where it says number nine uh that can currently be adjusted if you'd like by the planner and the engineer who are in the audience I mean that would be pretty pretty big buffer of industrial to residential and that is something that they are working on and they can certainly adjust if you'd like can you can you show a bigger broader picture than what's right there Mr chair why they're doing that how many houses are we talking about there did you speak to me would you mind speaking to you okay Linda Pearson I'm the planner for the applicant blue Triton brand sink I have a diagram which I could pass out to each of you and have one for the record as well so that it it will designate the specific properties why don't we do this um any other questions for staff well I have one um looking at the map so this is going to be used for parking is that right what I have to show you part of it will be on the northern part of our property but this will show you exactly how much property we're talking about in blue and where the parking lot will be in the

gray um is on existing property part of it is and part of it is on the new property okay move to receiving file uh almost we got a motion with a second second okay and roll call vote district one commissioner Oakley all right District Two commissioner Weightman uh hit you um District three commissioner Starkey aye District 4 commissioner Bradford aye District Five chairman Mariano aye yes thank you so my only question is um the yeah I'm looking here I can see that this this is not to our code so my my question is will the parking lot follow Pasco County code requirements I can't speak to that directly I can tell you that the parking lot will be approximately 265 feet from its southern boundary to the northern edge of that property owner's home and you'll see the Red Dot below the there are two three homes affected that um the three dots are sitting on the rooftops of the actual homes the blue part that you're seeing that says blue Triton property on it the areas to be vacated our camper Wood Lane which is completely on our property of the vacation area we're not affecting anything or any access used currently now or in the future by the area residents to the South that are currently in Pasco County they have no access to that there's nothing there our company has on that property for some time it's vacant and the three homes there are a considerable distance away from these are large lot residential lots so the south end of the parking lot is the reason that and the fact that we need to where it says blue Triton property connect the two Retention Ponds because there is a plant expansion there that's going to be adding approximately 30 new [Music] positions and they're about 56 part-time positions now that are slated to go 45 of which are slated to go full time these salary ranges being from Fort average salaries from 44 to 66 000 a year in this expansion blue Triton Brands purchased the Nestle Corporation in April of 2021 they purchased all of the U.S and Canadian plants approximately there are 27 of them and they're making their biggest best investment capital investment this year in this plant so we love that I know our program am skills has been out there to try and help with the workforce challenges my only issue is you have to follow them you have to follow our codes in your parking lot yes ma'am and and we will be annexing this into uh we have a pending application to Annex comp plan Amendment and the plant is all in the city the only portion that's not in this city is what you see in blue okay the orange all around and even Northern and Beyond is

currently developed with the plant activities well I hope you consider following some of our landscape format we certainly are and the landscaping and and buffering is going to be enhanced from What minimum code is so we are being very careful in all that we do to minimize the any impact to the surrounding community and those are my questions okay Mr steinsteiners yes if they annexed in the city they could just vacate them in the city couldn't they or should that be the route or they vacate it from us and then if they were if they were dedicated to the county in the original unrecorded plaque um this is probably the appropriate place for them to be okay um could I make an argument that the city could vacate it once they annexed it all in probably but right they're here they've oh yeah okay you're correct and if I might add we looked into that opportunity um but because the plan is recorded in the County public records and it is in was in the county when it was recorded there is no real it was like in 1915 if I'm recalling correctly there's no record that we can find that you ever accepted it you've never made any improvements to it and there have been no subsequent improvements it's on it's virgin land basically except what was used for maybe some houses at some point in time but this was what we were recommended to do to stay you know on the up and up and keep everything legal so that's why we're here today it looks like if they if they if we vacate it for them uh then when they're annexed in the city they'll follow City Rules for setbacks and all yes and that application is presently scheduled for annexation comp plan Amendment and rezoning later this month January 23rd actually and we're meeting again with the neighbors next Monday night so let me ask a question that the the two roads that you are vacating are they constructed off of your property at all they are improved with um their private roads they're not your roads but they are improved with shell and some asphalt um the area being vacated is not improved and there's also a third one on Leaf Lane you'll and the green stripe there Leaf Lane and your backup it shows all three but we purposely selected only the portions for the vacation and which blue Triton Brands owns all three sides and when the retention Pond is connected there will be naturally offense plus an enhanced landscape buffer for the residents and we're also looking at other buffering options on the site itself so they're isolated unconstructed public roads use smart right okay all right any other questions no more

questions let me just let me try to pump a comment quick anyone here in the in the public in the audience from the public like to speak anyone on WebEx there's no one on WebEx okay we did have the comments made earlier on the comments but keeping those in mind um respect to the board approval a little motion in a second second motion a second okay roll call vote district one commissioner Oakley all right District Two commissioner Weightman District three commissioner Starkey aye District Four commissioner Bradford aye District Five chairman Mariano okay well that concludes the agenda for today is anyone else have anything else you want to add yes commissioner waiting go ahead [Music] congratulations well thank you very much all right yes thank you yeah Granddad for the first time it's a great job it is all right all right thank you okay [Music] foreign [Music] Wildlife depend on you to keep them healthy excess fertilizer grass clippings trash oils and pet waste wash into gutters and storm drains when it rains stormwater carries these pollutants directly into our lakes and rivers creating an unhealthy