01.12.2021 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Hybrid Virtual Meeting (Afternoon Session)

[Music] chairman mike's you're live on video just see you now some videos on everybody's here ready you guys ready yeah i think she'll show up good afternoon everyone i would like to call back to order the pasco county board of county commissioner meeting of january 12 2021 i would like to remind everyone present to please silence all electronic devices and mute your microphones now it's time for proceed with the public hearing agenda there are no ordinances on the agenda so now we will proceed with procedures of rezonings mr steinsteiner please review the procedures and zone mr chairman i'll be happy to there are two rezoning 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 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 for planning commission recommendation or anyone wishing to object to any condition of the rezoning may at this time request the petition to be pulled from the consent agenda in which case that application will be heard under the regular agenda later on during the meeting otherwise all rezoning applications on the pla on the consent agenda will be approved by a single motion and vote if you wish to speak to any petition please give your name and address and whether or not you've been sworn for the record these are quasi-judicial public hearings the law in florida is that mere public support or opposition of an application is insufficient for this board to take action please limit your comments to those criteria found within the board's land development code now we have to swirl them in yes madam clear can you swear then anyone's going to speak to any of the public items needs to be sworn in at this time right um yes so we would have people on webex that are the applicant's team that would need to need to be sworn in and there may have been somebody who who has shown up at the kiosk i was just thinking you don't have anybody on webex i have no one on webex okay uh is there anyone at the kiosk there's no one at the kiosk at this time

i want to have the key action okay so when the applicant we may want to do swear the last time the applicant's team shows up right okay okay the one so the first item's p81 oh that doesn't need to be continued on record correct yes so yes gary do you want to go through p79 and p 80 the continuances and let's get them out of the way yes i may um do the publication sure okay so publication for item p 79 was published in the tampa times on november 15 2020. and the item p80 was published in the temp 2020. thank you uh terry pitos with planning and development department item p 79 is a zoning amendment uh requesting continuance the title of which is trust number 7541207 land service corporation trustee this was a change in or this will be a change in zoning from an ar ac and c2 to a c2 and i1 at the northeast corner of the intersection of i-75 and blanton road that's being continued to the i don't have too much data discontinued to february 9 water county commissioners meeting in date city at 1 30 pm and item p80 is a zoning amendment continuance uh for seven okay let's get a motion on 79 first move to continue 79 second okay got a motion in a second all those in favor say aye aye aye motion pass thank you and item p80 is a zoning amendment uh requesting continuance titled seven oaks mpud master plan unit development by sb associates limited partnership it is a request to continue to a date uncertain we will continue to be concerned second and motion second be continued all those in favor say aye all right [Music] p81 item p81 was published in the tampa bay times on november 15th 2020. item p81 is a zoning amendment uh entitled 2g g llc it's a change in zoning from a c2 general commercial district and an r4 high density residential district to a c2 general commercial district in northwest pasco county on the northwest corner of the intersection of u.s highway 19 and new york avenue containing approximately 0.61 acres it comes to you with a recommendation of approval okay is there anyone here just from the public to speak to this item there's no one on webex and i have no emails on this item okay let's check for the kiosk instead okay somebody showed up is anyone at the kiocks there's no one at the kiosk thank you okay i want to speak for it so let it remain on consent

item p82 is a large-scale comprehensive plan amendment entitled salem it's a large-scale comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use maps 215 and sheet 20 changing from res 3 residential 3 dwelling units per gross acre to res 6 residential 6th 12 units per gross acre on approximately 77.21 acres of real property located on the south side of tower road south of bexley village drive and it comes to you with a recommendation to approve item p82 was published in the tampa bay times on october 28 2020. okay there's no one on the web just to clarify uh mr chairman approval of the transmittal of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment that's the recommendation and to answer your question there is no one on webex and i do not have emails for item keys emails okay is anyone at the kiocs for item number p82 there's no one at the kiosk thank you okay that finished the consent items do i have a motion move over pull the consent agenda second got a motion in a second all those in favor say aye aye aye push and pass five zero okay move on to the next item is p eight three yes and i believe staff is available to make that presentation item 83 was published on tampa bay times on october 21st 2020 and i will need to swear in anyone that um okay is there anyone um on webex i guess not no nobody on webex there is no one on web webex but i do have emails to read into the record and there were emails um for received and filed well hold on a minute so todd has the applicant's team been promoted at this point yes sir they are online now so i would ask the clerk to swear in the applicant's team um before we start with this public hearing okay those to speak to this matter if you could please raise your right hands do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you god i do i do okay thank you okay is there terry who's making your presentation um christina acosta should be on webex make that presentation todd has miss acosta been promoted she is she's online i don't know why we can't hear it sounds like maybe she's having problems with her microphone because i do hear some sort of sound on the other end so i can do it okay so unless christina can jump in i'll go ahead and start the presentation so p83 is pd21cu08 it's a conditional use request entitled

adventist health system sunbelt healthcare corporation the project is located where the star is on the west side of brewspie downs approximately 350 feet south of eagleston boulevard in the wesley chapel area the site contains 16.24 acres and is currently undeveloped the africa is proposing to develop a site with a maximum of 248 multi-family dwellings the surrounding area is characterized by residential and commercial uses the subject area has a future land use of mu which is mixed use mixed uses under the comprehensive plan the it is outside of the policy area for the newly adopted multi-family policy directive that the board of county commissioners passed in july of 2020 which outlines the review process for projects alongside 456. this is the surrounding zoning around the subject property in the pink which is currently a c2 use or c2 zoning next slide and this is showing the the subject property within the future land use context illustrating the mu emanating from wesley chapel boulevard to the north southward along two speed downs surrounded by pd's and some conservation flues next slide and the aerial of the surrounding area eagles then wraps to the north and west of the subject site the site is primarily along roosby downs as indicated on the area next slide access would be off of bruce b downs as a result this is the conceptual site plan that had been provided to staff indicating four buildings with access main access off of bruce b downs and a large wetland to the south of the subject property or on the subject property next slide and the recommendation before the border county commissioners today is uh one of the four identified on the slide and then your agenda memo um you may approve the conditional use requests which would be consistent with the recommendations made by staff with the conditions therein approve the conditional use crest with modified conditions uh deny the conditional use request or direct the planning and development department to another action as may be desired by the border county commissioners having completed that presentation i'd like to move into a follow-up presentation to provide some context to the to the board regarding the multi-family land use as it relates to the county how it looks in the county uh how it looks in the south market area and how it looks within the local commission district as soon as they um

load up the powerpoint yes perfect so this is going to be a very quick presentation to recap some of the high points made during the february 2020 workshop on multi-family that we had last year generally defined in the land development code multifamily is a is known as a dwelling multiple family a building containing two or more dwelling units and there are three multi-family euclidean zones currently identified in the land development code mf1 which is 12 volumes per acre uh nf2 which is 18 and mf3 which is 24 dwelling in this breaker that's the definition in the land of elmer code the definition and the comprehensive plan notes a building containing two or more dwelling units including units that are located one over another additionally within chapter two uh in the future land use element it specifically explains it as duplexes multi-family units condominiums and townhouses which in the context of the comprehensive plan multi-family therefore encaps the term multi-family therefore encapsulates everything that is more than a single-family detached house so single-family attached duplex town house etc apartment next slide so in the comprehensive plan 21 out of the 50 sub-area policies that exist make provisions for multi-family and we'll note that throughout the county 26 of those are in the res 6 future land use and 27 are within the res 9 future land use and data gathered shows that about 67 of zone parcels in the county are capped by the flu and this is an important point that i'll illustrate in a subsequent slide next slide so i'm not going to go through this but this is essentially the map indicating all the different areas within the colony that multifamily could potentially be built in and includes both the euclidean zones and mpud zones but keep in mind that that the many yellow areas are the single-family residential districts so it's provided as a contrast to where multi-family is allowed next slide so when we look at the zoning districts by the acres we realize that agricultural zoning takes up about 64 percent as a county that's the big green uh piece of the pie there mpud zoning is about 22 percent of the county uh residential zoning itself is 11 is two percent and industrial is one percent and if we zoom into that residential uh slice of a pie out of that eleven percent uh ninety four percent of that

is single family zoning and uh six percent of that is multi-family zoning so we see that within the residential context how much multi-family there is next slide um this graph illustrated how much of the multi-family is what type of euclidean zoning district so six percent of the eleven percent right so 75 percent is zoned mf1 23 is zoned on f2 and two percent is on mf3 the bar chart here illustrates the contrast between the percentage of acres zoned for single-family residential which are the bars and the percentage of multi-family zoned acres which is the red line and since the project that we're talking about today is in the south market area we'll focus on the middle bar there 12.44 percent is residential districts and single family residential districts and 1.5 percent of the south market area is multi-family zoning next slide please so across the market areas um a good way to understand the amount of multi-family that exists within uh each of the the market is to know how many units there are based on our estimations back in february in the south market area there were a potential of 8103 units in the west market area where i think it's to be expected you have the most at about 19 213 units in the central uh market area is 3000 or so and in the east it has the least with 1 113. so 67 multi-family zoned acres are capped by the flu as we noted and the potential for non-single-family detached units in total is about 34 277 units this is county-wide uh perspective so and then based on the nal codes for multi-family and condos there are approximately 23 092 units built today or at least in february this number may have increased slightly since february um maybe by a couple hundred uh given the rate at which construction takes place 57 of the multi-family units were built under mpuds uh next slide can you understand this right for a second yes how many were condos built can you go back once check out the condos how many of those are condos yeah which is one on based on nal 03 and all four yeah i don't have the breakdown on how many of those are actual condos but as i noted previously the land development code and the comprehensive plan they don't make a distinction between condos or townhouses or condos and apartments it's all put together in that one term multi-family right but do others separate them out or

we just are we unique um i i think the data you can dig into it and find out i don't have that answer on me right now though that's it before but yeah with mine okay okay um perhaps some of the staff that might be listening can research that and send me a webex teams note next slide um in terms of the mpuds there are 210 mpuds in the county 21 are specifically focused on multi-family those 21 amputees yield 8 349 units there are an additional 70 amputees that include the possibility of multi-family units as a part of residential uses across the county but these units are not the exact number of these units are not known um mainly for reasons of land use equivalency matrices and i'll get into that in short but based on uh nal coded 03 there are five 7 fourteen apartments in mpuds apartment units apartments there are okay there are that many apartment units apartment units not buildings not buildings units seven thousand yeah next slide please that's just the impurities that's yeah that sounds another single ones that are computing that's impurities right yes i think so yeah um and this is just a reminder uh from what we had talked about back in february that there are is a number of options in red in the residential sector in terms of uh the types of buildings that can be built to accommodate multi-family so on the left end of this spectrum is your traditional single family detached home and on the far right and is what the graphic illustrates as a mid-rise you could use the word apartments apartment building there as an example of something that can go up four stories or so but then there's quite a middle ground that exists between those two extremes these include duplexes triplexes courtyard departments bungalow courts townhouses multiplexes live work units and that's just the terminology used in the graphic here there's other types of terminologies and building typologies that you could accommodate uh multi-family in in different forms and appearances so that's the point of this graphic that we talked about back in february uh next slide please so at this point i'm going to talk about multi-family in two parts uh this project is in located in the south market area so i'm going to talk about euclidean zones within the overall south market area itself and in the next slide i'm going to talk about mpuds specific to the commission

district 2 which this project is in so out of the entire south market area 815 acres are zoned mf1 mf2 and mf3 those are the euclidean zones that's that amounts to about 1.5 percent of the land use in south market out of those 85 percent is mf1 zoning so 691 acres 96 acres are nf2 and 28 acres are zoned mf3 um the table to the left at the bottom illustrates what the maximum possible gross density is mentioned it earlier it's for one two and three it's 12 18 and 24. um but the the real focus of this uh slide here is to look at the chart nate titled by the flu the zoning density is not realized what do i mean by that out of the 815 acres fully two-thirds of those acres are within red six and res nine future land use categories which means that even if you just look at mf1 specifically the 12 dwelling units per gross acre that the zoning district allows is never realized when the red six or the res 9 is overlaid on top of it and those densities are then capped at either six dwelling units per gross acre per the future land use or nine dwelling units per gross acre so two-thirds are not uh realizing their zoning density potential and then with regard to the to the last third let's say in the res 12 24 in roi it's kind of a mixed bag depending on where you know if you have an mf3 uh in a register before it's going to realize its potential potentially can you say that in layman's terms does that mean there aren't going to be as nearly as many units built as could be allowed i don't know i don't want to yeah basically that yeah it's a good way to summarize it um if the future land use says that you can build six dwelling units per gross acre but your zoning is mf1 it allows you 12. you're not going to be able to build the additional six because the future land use is holding you at six right so you won't be able to build as much as you as you noted so so it's a cap it's a cap on density um so this is where the majority the red box illustrates where the majority of the multi-family zoning is falling within the south market area now key point is that in earlier slides i mentioned that 67 percent of multi-family zones are falling county-wide now are falling within the red six and res nine future land use categories we see that number come up again here when we're speaking specifically to the south market area that about two-thirds

are indeed within the red six and wes nine again so the proportions are coming down from county-wide and being reflected within the south market area specifically um next slide so as i mentioned the second part of this is to focus in on the commission district where this project is located and consider the mpuds that are taking place now there are 68 mpuds in commission district 2. 25 mpuds enable multi-family entitlements and as i mentioned earlier these this means that anything greater than single-family detached so the single-family attached the townhouses the condos the apartments etc those are all lumped together in the comprehensive plan land development code as multi-family 13 of those 25 are na enable multi-family land use by the land use equivalency matrix and the trade-offs that a loom uh provides so for the benefit of our listeners at home a land use what a land use equivalency matrix is it's um a instrument that uh considers the trip generation how many uh trips come and go from a land use right it's an estimation based on the ite the institut institute of transportation engineers so it measures strip generation between land uses and we use the loom in order to understand what the impacts are going to be the transportation network such that whatever land use is ultimately approved it's not going to overwhelm the local transportation network and so we use the total amount of trips generated by a project and within a loom we say you can trade off your entitlements of you know retail square footage for residential or vice versa as long as you maintain the same number of trips that are coming in and out of the development so that's what the loom trade-offs are all about so 13 mpuds enable multi-family through loom and i mentioned earlier that that's kind of hard to do kind of hard to estimate because depending on the number of other non-residential entitlements a developer may potentially want to do within a mpud they can translate that into an equivalent amount of trips in residential so for example if you were to change 100 000 square feet of retail into residential then i'm just using numbers just to illustrate they may translate to 200 apartments but if you go 150 000 or maybe 200 000 square feet of retail and you translate that into

apartments maybe it goes up to 400 right so you get the idea of the more you trade in one area the more you can pick up in another but it's not an equivalency right it's not like you're getting 200 000 square feet of residential for 200 000 square feet of retail saying there's less trips generated in residential than there is in retail well what i'm saying yes right so but the total amount of trips stays balanced because they they have they have a trade yes yeah so the the outcome in terms of chip generation remains balanced where it was approved sometimes it comes in less which is a good thing it saves our transportation network and i will mention that 10 of those 13 are located in wesley chapel so next slide please so this is a zoomed in shot of commission district 2 uh in the wesley chapel area so we're focusing around the area of state road 5456 i-75 bruce b downes region and just to the north at state road 54 and to the south is where the county line is with hillsboro and i've circled all of the mpuds that have the multi-family entitlements so anything that has a circle has multi-family a red circle is an mpd with a defined multi-family entitlement a yellow circle indicates an mpud with a multi-family entitlement via the land use equivalency matrix instrumentary that i explained and as you can see there are quite a few alternate gray that you see on the map is mpud and there are 10 such mpods that have land use equivalency matrices that enable the potential trade-off to multi-family land use that doesn't necessarily mean that the land that multi-family land use has actually been built out there however as we presented previously in february um i believe the statistic was that about 2 000 2500 apartment units had been built within this geographic region um so give you a context for how all those mpuds are currently operating mr chairman yes sir hey thanks terry you're doing a great job um i guess one thing i just want to add to this map is what we don't see on here are other apartment complexes that aren't part of an mpud so that's also important to uh to state is that there are parcels here that have apartment complex already apartment places already or do have entitlements or are in the process and already have been approved of building um apartments in the future so if you were even at those this area would

light up even more so yeah and i think that's part of the story of the multi-family euclidean zones that we were talking about so but these aren't necessarily apartments are you showing a new river on here yes new rivers the new river is a tnd which is going to have live works town homes potentially it could yeah it could be again we're talking about multi-family not specifically a apartment or a condo project or a town home project we're identifying where the multi-family entitlement exists with the land use equivalency matrix we would have to dig into each of those mpuds to see is this land use equivalency matrix making a trade for apartments specifically is it making a trade for townhouses is it making a trade for whichever these are all apartment buildings that there are apartment buildings out there yes there's about two thousand apartment buildings this is a map of multi-family yes it's meant for multi-family which is a duplex which is a town home just no right yeah according to the comprehensive plan it's all along together oh he showed us what multi-family well i mean we don't have any of those duplexes around there like you're talking a new river does yeah well so mr chairman just to add this does not include new river because this cuts off of morris bridge i think number one i'm sorry morris new river is closer to 301 in commissioner oakley's district so i see i see it cut off at morris bridge here and we continue to go on past more bridge there's a new new river road is that the same one yeah so new river is closer to 301 in commissioner oakland's district that's commissioner oakley's district yeah i i break off i'd have to look around morris bridge okay because you so you have the map is correct i just yeah yeah that's not i may have never used it with number 50 there um i'd have to go back and look at the list mr chairman yeah yes sir so terry when i look at all these npu ds i mean granted when the the commission approves these mpuds they're looking to keep a balance as far as employment operating uh employment generating facilities as well as residential with the components and we've got a lot of let's say we're loaded with residential we've done a lot of apartments as well we stopped you guys from putting a lot of storage units along 54-56 as well we made it made a thing as far as protecting 56 54 as well with apartments do we need to go further with this as far as to give you more direction of what we're really looking for as far as employment generating

uh things with these mpd so that maybe the matrix doesn't work out as easy for a split well i mean it's it's standard protocol when the planning development department establishes land use equivalency matrices in negotiation with the developers that we do not give ground as it relates to office entitlements and other employment generating uses so in other words they can't trade away their employment generating uses for more retail let's say or for more residential the office is the office and it must stay it can't be traded away so in that sense the land use equivalency matrix is not really hurting our employment generation potential it's just trading other entitlements that are listed in that list for residential or vice versa but do we need to look at that matrix so and try to make it more beneficial to get those things from say apartments over to uh more employment generating especially when you get something like a major arterial i mean it we can look into that it's it's not currently the way it's uh designed but you mean you can you can update the way we approach the looms sure i mean just when we look all over the county for all these things the things we want to have we want employment we want we want our people working here not just having more residential when i can get that other balance so if that's something we can control and make look at that matrix maybe that's something we need to look at yeah i mean the language equivalency matrix allows for control on trip generation specifically but and so there's there's probably mechanisms in there that we can yeah because i'm not looking to just chip trip generation i'm looking for what i want to see do i want to create jobs a little more residential mr chairman yes sir if i may i believe the planning director is providing you this as a general overview of how multifamily is currently developing we're not in today's hearing even talking about an mpud so if you want to have a discussion about what you're going to do to the mpud is to to make them develop out more in line with what the board wants that's the same discussion as we talked about in old business it's a more global discussion mr county attorney well notice this is a very weird thing to have this coming for us this way so i got caught up in the moment so thank you thank you mr county attorney um to answer your question from earlier though uh commissioner mariano well i'm approaching the end of the

presentation itself but you you asked a question on the breakdown of condos versus apartments don't worry about it okay move on my attorney's right [Laughter] um although i think it would be germaine to understanding the multi-family context just so um you know that the i feel sufficient okay so um so that's the map um next slide please oh that's not his presentation so at the february 2020 workshop what what came out of that workshop was a mobility if you updated multi-family which the fees were increased in the summer of 2020. in july of 2020 we looked at what was uh titled the multi-family policy directive and i'll go into that in just a second and then also that the thing that came out of that workshop sort of ancillary to that was a mobility fee update was begun in october of 2020 this year so we're working on that currently um next slide please okay so with regard to the multifamily policy directive itself this directive was passed by the board of county commissioners in july of 2020 it was specifically tailored to new multi-family zoning and future land use amendments which this would be uh a a case um the state road 5456 corridor from gun highway to us 301 was the focus area and the the uh the approach that was outlined in the directive was to indi integrate uh the multi-family use with a mix of employment generating land uses and then we established a 2 000 foot zone on either side of stable 54 56 where the multi-family must be behind either behind non-residential land uses or be vertically integrated if it was going to be on the on the roadway itself and then the water county commissioners said if if the planning and development department finds we need to update the company's plan with the land development code go do it then there was a subsequent additional amendment related to not an amendment but a clarification to as to when such projects as to when this directive would apply to applications in the in the queue um which has been implemented um and then it said that uh when we were talking about state world 54 we're talking about gun highway to i-75 and when we're talking about state board 56 we're talking about i-75 to us-301 the gra next slide please the graphic that we discussed at the july board meetings was this one which illustrated the the coloration that we show along uh statewide 5456 illustrates that 2000 foot buffer

so again at the top you have from gun highway to lando lakes boulevard in the middle you have from land lakes boulevard to brisby downs and the third one down is from bruce b downs to gullible gall boulevard or us-301 so this was the um the area within which the board intended for the multi-family policy directive to apply um and as you'll note that the subject property on today's agenda is located on wesley chapel boulevard the east or excuse me bruce b downs south of wesley chapel boulevard east of i-75 yeah 350 feet south of western travel boulevard mr chairman yes and that completes my mr moore so terry or maybe the team can you put up um a couple more slides one was the current apartments that are actually area these are actually apartments not condos or townhomes there's a slide we're working on it okay i know i said i know that went out yesterday so okay i'm gonna let you um you know what go ahead and just move okay that's stuff that just went over with terry um go to the next slide next slide okay you just sold that one okay next slide okay so here's um some new projects that are going up charleston and wesley chapel 228 cypress creek town center which commissioners i think stark you might have mentioned earlier 300 aiken mpud 252 and lexington oaks 248 does went up and they can't fill those now um go to the next one if you would they couldn't sell them um they have signs out there that they're like crazy that they're not full um next one okay well you can get this and this just shows you where the current where the applicant is looking to build a uh apartment complex if you see that arrow back there if you go to the edge of the woods there's just a road so if you go from lot to lot that already has entitlements there's already entitlements that close so if you look to the left the arrow to the left or boost me downs oh okay we can do that one too but go back one more please so we can people can see that better so across the street about a i don't know maybe a sand wedge for mr mariano probably less than a sandwich actually because you're right more like a putter more like a putter if you put it really hard that parcel already has entitlements to build apartments it's had them for years now you can go to the next line across the street as we know wiregrass ranch which is across the street from bruce b downs wiregrass has multiple timelines where

apartments have not been built yet we can go to the next line okay back up because we missed one we missed really the one the more important ones keep going back somehow i got skipped keep going back one more okay we're missing a slide that actually shows the current apartment complexes by name that are in the area it's in there somewhere because it was part of that presentation it says cur the slide says current apartments in area as the name of the complex it was all together as one uh no sir we don't see that one in this slide deck i don't know how it was yeah it was they sent it last night it was all the same package i mean they're they're actually the slides are in a row i guess we'll have to come back to that unfortunately um so i guess i'll um sorry commissions you can't see it it was sent um it was mentioned earlier about actual apartment complexes some are part of mpd's but a lot of them aren't part of mpuds in that area i got one two three four five six seven eight nine ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen those are apartment complexes in this area where this yes in that in that area around district two in that area and previously like i told you ones that aren't included that are in the process right now one two three four and then they're also hay road was one went through the planning commission on january 7th this one there's another one under staff review and there was another pre-op for another one in the area too so you can add all those up you can do the numbers of how many actual apartment complexes are in that area here do you have a map of that um i do i don't have it to todd yet i'd have to email it to him but it was part of our february 2020 workshop presentation that illustrated where all of the apartment complexes the commissioner is referring to are um we don't have that and if we can get if they'll be great if we have that ones that one slide up so they can actually we got it you got it all right well you just show that up throw that up there and show the commissioners going back to the workshop as terry mentioned before um again it doesn't count the new ones that are in the process of being built as well the ones that are recently approved are you talking about where it said north south east and west if you look right now there you go and this was the data that that you pulled from the workshop yep yeah that's why they're not all on there i wanted to include that and i wanted to mention the ones that have been

approved since then the ones i just mentioned a second ago plus the ones that are already going through the process and there's others that are going through or going through the pre-app process as well so these are already built yes yes if it's the data from february 2020 they're not all impudies why don't i why because we're just like like this applicant today is just trying to resolve one parcel a lot of these are the map that i showed with the circles is very similar to this map a lot of a lot of these are not mpuds so what does area mean that that's a relative word what is what is that area around the district 2 area so these are the current apartments in district 2. these are the current apartments and yeah so what yeah so the the study that was done back in february was to look at i believe it was a two mile rate one or two mile radius around the intersection of 556 and i-75 so we looked at that whole location essentially between uh i forget what the western limit was i think we stopped at roosevelt yeah even though there's still some in yeah that area apartments in that area we stopped when you when we applied this uh radius around that that area um we came up with these apartment complexes specifically for the discussion at the workshop so to put that in context i don't know how i mean as a sum of total is it more than normal is it less than normal what does that mean well i i think the the total number of units um if i remember correctly was somewhere between 2 000 to 3 000 units in just those apartment complexes that we showed as the commissioner noted there's more that are beyond that that one or two mile radius that we talked about um but one of the things that i mentioned earlier was that there was a breakdown of the number of apartment units i think we said that there was 7 500 apartment units specific to apartments in the county and then out of those 7 500 or so about two to three thousand are actually in the in the wesley chapel area if i if i wrote the data correctly so and this is something that we kind of touched upon at the workshop if i recall correctly because it made sense that a high intensity or higher intensity land use like multi-family would locate close to high intensity travel corridors right 75 or 55 so um this is a a reason not the only one but a reason

for why there's a concentration developing along and around the interstate area and when when i heard um a number bandied around and maybe we're gonna hear that um later is that uh apartments at said occupy 90 maybe 98 percent i i don't have that data to be able to speak on that i haven't done a marketing a recent market analysis to know mr mr chairman yesterday that i mean that was brought up i'm i'm going to disagree with that number just because i mean it was months ago and then i know it's not your number so um it wasn't a scientific poll by any means um but [Music] have um past history before i was in health care in sales and medical sales but i know how to cold call and uh i cold call it i think i mentioned that before the workshop a number of apartment complexes and i think there was like again eight or nine and only one of them couldn't quote get me in in a two-bedroom apartment then all the others had had openings um and that was those were in the wesley chapel area though i'm not talking about the rest of the county in the wesley chapel area um you look at the one at lexington oaks i mean they're they're trying to drive you in still you know the signs are up um let's have some it's in front of lexington oaks i don't know remember the name of it i think it's on just on the sheet yeah there you go um but we talked about occupancy occupancy okay but where are the where are the people coming from are they our residents are they coming over from hillsborough county because hillsborough county is is not building more apartments in that new tampa area adjacent to wesley chapel right for whatever reason i think they're making good decisions over there in the city of tampa to not allow more over there that's my opinion but so they're not building more so they're coming over here so where you know you think about the benefit where is the benefit for the citizens and the residents of pasco county when you have an area again like new tampa that you don't see in building anymore so they made their decisions whatever they made their decisions i mean they they obviously they're not either they're not approving them or whatever they're doing i'm not making assumptions but they're not building them so they go across you know they blow them across the line the county line and they're coming here from all over the nation well any any resident that isn't living here now is coming from another county i

mean i i don't i don't understand that comment what do you understand about it i'm just making a fact and saying it's not beneficial yeah we're saying we're open for business here so people don't move here but my question my question to terry is um um and i think it's important question is we put a lot of stuff in front of us that frankly is complicated um so are you saying i know what he's saying but i'm asking you to professional is that an appropriate number for the the investment in infrastructure or an inappropriate number 3 000 in that area i mean is it abnormal you know because we don't want to be have too many um but we don't want to have too few because that raises the prices it becomes unaffordable i would say the same thing for entry-level homes do we really want the whole county to be entry-level priced homes i don't know but what is it is it an appropriate number of units is that what you're asking yeah i mean let's you know let's say you have a neighborhood of 5 000 homes and uh 50 of them are apartments in in an mpud i mean that seems like that would be top-heavy but well i don't know that i can't i'm heavy in that area i don't know that i'm qualified to make a judgment call on the appropriateness of the number of units per se i would just underline the graph that i had showed previously indicating the quantities of single-family detached residential that exists in the county as compared to multi-family uh within the county and we saw that even in the south market area specifically where this project is uh only 1.5 percent of the land area with is zoned for multi-family purposes what is that sorry 1.5 of the south market area i mean that so so that i mean i could just give you the data the the appropriateness factor is ultimately i think what the vision of the community is what works um i will say that this this is going to be an area of interest during the conference of plan update um which is um beginning um but i i i can just point to the data and illustrate you that only one point five percent is zoned for multi-family at this mr chairman is there concentration around i-75 the dots on the map would illustrate that and is that normal in a county that i i mean i've always heard through you know our families developers and um that and i've been to a lot of meetings and seminars and whatever that you concentrate your density near the highest amount of public infrastructure expense yes so and that's what our

comprehensive plan is is telling us to do essentially so you will see the most density along the corridors of 54 52 75 maybe around the intersections of 41 and 21-19 and then you radiate out lower lower lower lower yes that's what i'm obviously going to find and that's what our comprehensive plan is asking for thank you mr chairman when we set up mqds we are looking to maximize the value of the property we're trying to get employment generating things that are going to create and add value pasco county for years was a bedroom community because we only did residential so i think we set things up to be c2 i think i don't think we're thinking apartments i think we're thinking let's get some enjoyment employment generating prof uh opportunities so i i'd just like to say mr chairman that this has been very weird having this whole presentation before us before our hearing in the middle of the hearing to go through all this dialogue and we haven't heard from the applicant yet yeah so i don't know why we're going this whole wayward educate me now we're here let's get to the hearing mr chairman i think the applicant is on webex he has been promoted barber are you there so you ready or did you hear me there you go okay it takes a minute hi barbara will heights 6327 grand boulevard newport florida 34652 and i have been sworn i have teammates with me i'm not sure they've all been elevated i can see it looks like pete pensa and charlie potter have been elevated to panelists the other two i'm not sure where they're at are aaron landry my client from mass capital and steve henry so perhaps as we get started here we could ask your ic team to make sure that my full team is elevated to participate as panelists you are good to go barbara thank you pete pensa is going to make the presentation on behalf of avid group he has a powerpoint that's been put together i would agree with the sentiment for the commissioner this has been a strange presentation so far um but i do want to say that the data that you receive is received was the data from the representations of of terry peters is the data you received in last last february when you did the workshop and you set policy over the summer based upon so you considered that data you made policy regarding that data you had public input regarding the policy you made and we're following that policy so you haven't been presented with new data or maybe you have

it's really hard for me to tell um if if all of this was the presentation of staff or if it was if it was interjected with other presentations but from what mr pito said it sounds like this is the data that was presented to you that you already set policy on and we're following that policy but not to belabor that point let me have uh ask that pete pence from avid group present his powerpoint yes hello uh my name is pete pensa i'm director of planning with avid group the planners engineers for the project i'm an aicp certified planner our address is 2300 curlew road palm harbor uh if you could i'll share my screen uh he was sworn yeah yes i was born thank you sir you may proceed okay can i share my screen so that i can drive the powerpoint okay i'm going to go through i'll try to be brief it is a little bit of a long presentation i'll keep it as short as possible the project's located on bruce b downs south of the 54 intersection we have an aerial here to show you the general area the area to the north of our site is predominantly commercial uses along with numerous medical uses uh integrated in the commercial areas uh to the southwest of us recently uh blue heron alf the seven oak senior living uh is under construction for 237 bed assisted living and recently daycare announced that they're going to build a 54-acre medical complex that will employ 220 uh full-time employees as well as part-time employees you can see also to the west of us our car dealerships and to the south is some local retail and townhome development the property is located in the 54 corridor uh the area as you can see on the land use map on the right has a future land use designation of mixed use which allows for up to 30 units per acre the staff talked about earlier other constraints such as wetlands and zoning can modify what the maximum densities are that are allowed i just want to note that the property is zone c2 which allows multi-family as a conditional use the property would not need rezoning and it would maintain the c2 zoning which does allow for commercial as well this i went over the mixed uses also get past that uh multi-family is uh compatible and complementary to those uses it provides a transition from the commercial uses to the north to the lower density residential to the south and it is an infield location located behind the existing commercial the fronts on

54. we are located in the south market area as staff talked about earlier so i won't read these but i want to just note that it does talk about being an urban gateway supporting transit opportunities higher density development compact development and mixed use to promote a live work environment the multi-family policy staff went into is not applicable to the site uh for a couple reasons primarily that it's located uh along the 54 quarter east of i-75 which was excluded from the policy and we're over 2000 feet we're actually three miles to the north of state road 56 as you can see in the two overview maps uh on the slide uh even though the policy is not applicable to this development i do want to note that it does uh further the intent of the policy directive because it is located behind the non-residential uses that are already existing on state road 54. it is an infill location it is located along a transit corridor and i'll go into that later and it is an area that's designated for urban development and as i pointed out earlier there's there's additional commercial employment generating uses uh specifically the alf in the hospital that are going to be generating more more demand for live work in this area even though the site was rezoned back in 1984 uh it has limited commercial desirability uh it's remained vacant for over three and a half decades since getting the commercial zoning uh and the primary reason for that is because it's not located on a major intersection it is a mid-block location uh it does have wetlands uh on the basically the southern third of the site a number of constraints that make it less desirable for commercial development that wants to cluster on 54 and at the major intersections this just shows some of the other uses in the area i'll go into those in any detail uh this is the conceptual site plan that we submitted for the application uh comprises of three four-story buildings with a total of 248 units that translates to a density of of approximately 24 units per upland acre it will provide for on-site active and passive recreation areas as well as preservation of a significant amount of open space on the property uh pictures down at the bottom show some examples of the types of recreation amenities that are proposed with this development the site is located on a multimodal corridor the property has direct frontage on

bruce b downs which is a dot arterial roadway there is an existing multi-use trail that's located on the west side of brisk downs directly in front of the property and we will connect to that multi-use trail the the road is also a court transit corridor there's uh bus route 54 runs in front of the property and connects to uh east west bus routes that serve the entire county or most of the county uh wristbands is currently operating at and it's projected to continue operating at an acceptable level of service and that's per the uh the latest mpo report which was published in august of 2020 and the site is also not located in a hurricane evacuation zone so it would not put additional demands or burden on the transportation system or the county shelter facilities in the event of a hurricane event for a point of comparison we looked at what a typical suburban shopping center something in the range of about 120 000 square foot uh what it would generate for trip generation utilities this graph shows the number of trips that that shopping center would generate versus uh and that's the multi-colors on the left versus the light gray box on the right which shows the trip generation for the proposed department complex you can see it's a significant reduction in the number of trips compared to what would be expected to develop on the property and under the late future land use entitlements the intensity of development could be greater than that if it was built for commercial potable water sanitary sewer and reclaimed services are all available immediately adjacent to the site i won't go into the details but they are listed there the apartment complex in this case is shown in the light gray on the left that same commercial scenario shown in the blue box on the right the peak flows uh for both water and sewer would be significantly less for residential development than they would be for commercial putting less burden on the county's utility infrastructure at the planning commission hearing a question came up or a number of questions came up related to school capacity chris williams who's the director of planning services with pasco county schools sits on the planning board on the flying commissions evening and these are a few quotes to summarize it the school board does not have an objection to multi-family development

he did note that multifamily has less impacts on the school system than single family detached housing and that he felt that it was an appropriate location for multi-family the school board provided me with the uh the daily attendance daily membership numbers for the fall semester from august through july uh seven oaks uh elementary and its permanent classroom capacity uh is currently operating at 97 percent however there are uh 260 seats uh of capacity that are provided through relocatables or what's known as portable classrooms that are existing on the property which actually uh means that they're at 70 percent of their existing uh capacity including those classrooms the far right column shows that with the with this project there would be an increase of 29 elementary school students which would bring the permanent capacity to 101 percent to 73 of the existing seat capacity at the school uh cypress creek middle has plenty of capacity remaining for the additional 13 students at this project regenerate and cypress creek high school has capacity for the 17 students chris williams also pointed out at the meeting that the school board is in the process of preparing to open a develop a magnet school in the area and there are a number of private charter schools that have opened in the area uses while they haven't seen a decrease in demand from the charter schools yet they're expecting that change over time for parks and recreation uh that was brought up with the planning commission as well uh should be noted that staff evaluates and issues the concurrency certificate capacity for parks and recreation during the preliminary site plan review process if capacity is not available then that has to be addressed through a uh through an agreement with the county and the school board and the developer uh assuming that there's capacity which there is at this time uh then the project would proceed with concurrency uh for for uh i'm sorry i'm mixing it up they just talk about support they will do the capacity review for parks and recreation uh the county as you know has uh parks and recreation impact fees which are paid by the developer we did calculations for that and it'll be over 150 000 and impact fees that would be collected and likewise the developer has to provide for neighborhood neighborhood parks and recreation

facilities on site as part of the project uh should be noted that a number of the letters that you received from neighbors in adjacent development um they mistakenly said that the project was located within the seven oaks dri and community development district that is not the case this is not this property is not part of the cdd and would not um have neither have the right nor the expectation to use their recreation facilities uh among the benefits of multi-family development uh over three million dollars will be generated in impact fees as part of developing the project and it'll add over half a million dollars a year in additional property tax revenue uh also the multi-family development is not eligible for homestead exemption or save our homes so the value continues to rise over the years instead of being capped like it is for single-family detached development this is a rendering of a similar project it's not specific to the site but this gives you a general idea of what the project would look like these are some photographs of similar type projects as well to give you an idea of what it would look like and then finally community support these were letters were provided in the record blue heron senior living provided a letter in support of the project and then likewise baycare was a chapel hospital provided a letter in support of the project as well with that that concludes my presentation and i can answer any questions you may have okay any questions from the board no i i just want to hear comment i mean i i will say well no let's just hear a public comment i don't have any questions okay we have public comment we have emails or we have no one at the webex but we did have um seven emails submitted and asked to be read into the record and 17 were for receive and file if you would like me to yes go ahead and read this and direct me okay so the first email is from mark mcbride uh address is 4244 wincrest drive in wesley chapel dear commissioners i'm writing on behalf of seven oaks property owners association sopoa on our opposition to advent health system's request to change the zoning on property they own in seven oaks to multi-family seven oaks is a master planned community that is over 95 complete our community was strategically planned properly placing various zoning codes ensuring a proper balance to enhance the community feel we have currently there are three projects

entertaining zoning changes approving this project creates a slippery slope of which the residents overwhelmingly do not support approving these measures jeopardize the community we have and purchased into what good is a zoning code if it is changed at a developer's whim i spoke with eric wangsness ceo of advent health and discuss sopoa's opposition mr wangsness understood our perspective is fully aware of our contention in this to this matter and expressed his desire to maintain good will with the community unfortunately mr wangsness is not the decision maker on this project we are not against all apartments the seven oaks master plan has designated areas for multi-family dwellings some of which were previously built in fact land remains available which is currently zoned multi-family adding an additional area will open the door for additional change and overwhelm this area with multi-family structures directly conflicting with the intent of our master plan i urge you to deny this request and support the current master plan's intent thank you mark mcbride okay second email i have is for gary odoline address is 4385 scarlet loop in wesley chapel florida putting apartments on the land next to the hospital on the north end of seven oaks will lower our home prices totally unfair to existing homeowners in addition the added traffic would be dangerous on already overcrowded roads the added road noise would be unbearable to homes along the road the police already cannot control the speeding in the area's roads thank you gary ottoline the third email that i have is from kendra hass or haas and her address is 4201 granite glen loop in wesley chapel hello county commissioners i am one of many residents of seven oaks who is against more apartments right next to our community we are not against apartments or renters we already have apartments in seven oaks and there is land available in zone for additional apartments in the north part of seven oaks we simply don't need any more please vote no to re-zoning our neighborhoods is not i'm sorry please vote no to rezoning so our neighborhood is not altered further thank you the fourth email i have is from victoria knight address is 27700 pine point drive wesley chapel florida the moment may concern please reject the

rezoning request for parcel 07-26-0 and 18-26-20-00-00-100-0010 good job thanks the zoning was put in place after what we can assume was careful consideration and deliberation at the time nothing has changed in the community for rezoning to even be considered the community at large should be what the commission is concerned with and unless something drastically changes the zoning should be kept consistent i'm not against apartments or renters we already have apartments in seven oaks and there is land available and zoned for additional apartments in seven oaks and other areas of wesley chapel therefore there is no reason for the commission to consider rezoning those parcels of land i would like this email to be read into the record at oh sorry at the junior 12 meeting with the with this item to be heard sincerely victoria knight the fifth email that i have is from shane meehan address is 4201 granite glenn loop wesley chapel florida good afternoon i would like this email to be right into the record at the january 12 meeting when this item is is heard as a resident of seven oaks i would like to strongly urge you to deny the approval of the rezoning of the land to be made available for apartments with the new development of the bay care hospital i'm concerned not only with the area being saturated but for the safety of my fellow residents in addition there is already a cause for concern with the current traffic accidents which will only increase based on the projected number of day care hospital visitors when the project is completed we feel that with the addition of an apartment complex residence it will certainly cause an issue that will definitely not be positive for anyone when it comes down to safety with the current construction with the hospital loan it has taken some of the beauty away from our gorgeous community that was the factor of why we purchased our very first home here with all of the new developments we are forced to make a decision whether to stay or go the short the short period of time since we have been here that truly saddens me and my wife as we love our community and neighbors we understand that land is available and is owned by someone but also strongly feel that we as residents will suffer the most we too have been renters before as i am sure we all have but let's face it renters are not homeowners i urge the denial that it be rezoned for residential residential due to the fact that renters are not owners and the pride of maintenance does not compare

apartment complex or not there is no comparison okay the sixth email that i have is from unique hacker and address is 27017 cotton key lane wesley chapel florida season's greetings it has been brought to my attention that developers would like the zoning laws change so that so the so they can build apartments in the vacant lots in seven oaks i'm not sure how many elected officials live in seven oaks or the wesley chapel but we are not short of homes our lovely communities are being overrun and overwhelmed by all the new construction that you are approving you may consider the overbuilding of an area a positive thing which it can be but overbuilding which is what you are approving is a whole other thing along with the overpopulation comes increasing crime increase in accidents more panhandlers are lovely communities being trashed more abandoned buildings etc and in some areas you can start seeing the effects i'm asking you to put yourself in my place wesley chapel is a great family community and we would like it to remain as such please consider voting against the changes the zoning changing the zoning laws thank you for your time registered voter the seventh and last email is from susan schmidt's address is 26644 winged elm drive in wesley chapel dear county commissioners as resident of seven oaks in west chapel i urge you not to zone the land being sold by advent hospital to those who wish to build apartments we have plenty of rental units in the area for the infrastructure since we moved to wesley chapel in 2004 we have watched in enormous growth the infrastructure had not kept up with the influx of people the roads are more congested and the behavior behind the wheel more aggressive doctors dentists appointments are difficult to acquire two months uh two months to see a specialist in the area or get a cavity filled our children have been re redistricted losing their schools please don't add these additional people to at this time just for revenue rentals also bring more transients rather than stable families which are the backbone of safe and altruistic communities thank you so much cameron and susan schmitz is that all the ones that is the ones that have been asked to be read into the record and how many do we have um receiving file there are 17 17. all right i need a motion on the 17 emails to receive and file if they ask a question on that real quick mr chairman okay how many of the 17 were for or against the project because i think i saw it on a graph i don't have that information should be

on the okay well i've looked through them all they're all against mr chair i concur with that statement yeah and see if i didn't see a resident going the other way with it okay i can't see one positive emotional receiving file second and motion in a second all those in favor say aye aye motion mr moore commissioner moore the the listing that you were provided right shows that all of the emails that were received were against if that's in the for or against columns thank you my apologies it was noted on the document i did not notice that thank you okay mr chairman just to humor me if we can check the kiosk to see if there's anybody there and then it would be applicants anyone at the kiocks to speak to this matter there's no one at the kiosk all right thank you for blowing up the kia so displeasure it wouldn't no it would be applicant's rebuttal at this point okay miss will height this is correct this is barbara can you hear me yes we are thank you commissioner a couple things i wanted to point out and i do have other team members here i have aaron landry from mass capital um who is the actual client and developer of this property the extent you have any questions for him i have steve henry who is the transportation engineer with regards to traffic mr pence's presentation explained that this is a decrease in trips from the current zoning again if you have any specific questions so it's you have neighborhood opposition that always says things about traffic but this is actually a decrease in trips um over the current over the c2 zoning so but steve henry is here if you have any specific questions other than what pete has got went over his presentation i want to point out a couple things this is not a change in zoning we've heard over and over and over and the things right into the record that we're changing zoning the property has a c2 zoning district your c2 zoning district allows multi-family contemplates multi-family and says you have to go to a conditional use permit not a rezoning not a land use amendment we have land use running in place that allows for multi-family subject to getting the conditional use permit that we've applied for we are not in the 700 cri of some of the correspondence that i read from the residents were confused that somehow we were in 7-0 cri we were we were in the 7-0 cdd they thought we'd be taking away the capacity at their clubhouse this is a standalone project um not within the seven oaks master plan this particular property as pete pence uh told you and showed you in his

powerpoint presentation has been zoned since the 80s it's um it was owned in the 80s by the porter family when they owned the property it's just outside of where you do commercial nodes now a good location for commercial and the history of the fact that it's been sitting there all that time tell you that it tells you that as well i would note that you went through and said how many um residents had had reached out to the county but i read what i reviewed and i don't know if i was made aware of given everything but every piece of paper that i was given by staff that would be part of your record today i reviewed and i looked up every person who where they live and they all live in the single family detached portion of seven oaks seven oaks has a southern portion and a northern person the northern portion cuts off at eagleton boulevard where base care daycare is going north of eagleton boulevard and there's actually two associations there's a 7-0 property property owners association south of eagleton and there's the north 3232 proper association north our neighbors are the north 232 property owners association we are not adjacent to the um to the single family detached daycare is in between us with about a thousand feet from daycare um which will be daycares and support daycare is our neighbor seven um the group from blue heron the senior living is our neighbor they're in support there's town homes that are a neighbor never didn't receive any opposition to them and so our actual neighbors are not in opposition i have not seen any opposition from them so while there's single-family detached in the single family detached portion of seven oaks this northern portion where our actual we're actually locating uh we have not received any opposition her planning commission recommendation was five to one uh mr robert masayas um voted against the the application disclosing that he lived in seven oaks and that he had personal reasons why he didn't support it from his own opinion with regard to the data that was presented that i've received about five minutes before to hear public hearing started i think some of the noteworthy things is what what mr peters was trying to summarize for you which is the south market area is 1.1 1.51 percent of the acreage and multi-family districts

then you break that down you look at okay what's ms1 mf2 and mf3 85 of that is mf1 my clients developed townhomes in mf1 so there's 15 of that acreage for multi-family mf2 and mf3 is what we we do apartments in two-thirds of those acres notwithstanding the zoning being ms2 and mf3 two-thirds of those acres are in red six and red nine those are my my clients with town homes in my clients don't do apartments in red sticks and red nines so um while there's a lot of a big acreage number in acres not so much in percentage of your south market area very little bit of that available is available for markets for apartments you've heard some data regarding mpuds but the data was with the broad definition of multi-family that includes everything other than single-family detached so and i would just point out that remember this is the data that you did receive as a board and workshop now mr fitzpatrick was not part of the board at that time but the remainder of the board did receive that data and actually adopted a policy which is only you know six months old and um and that's the policy we're following so we as your staff have said we meet the criteria in the conference plan we meet the criteria in the land development code we have a recommendation of approval from planning commission they actually thought it was the statements from your planning commission members were things like this is exactly the way you tell us to plan transitional land use planning mixed use walk to work walk to retail um i just thought this was a good location for multi family mr chairman shouldn't rebuttal be public comment we're going back to terry's comments that we're rebutting that and that's already been done yeah so rebuttal is supposed to be limited you're covering everything aren't you barbara i i am i'm i had to have a chance to um be able to read and absorb what terry peters said because i wasn't made available to me so you know as a matter of process being able to actually look at it while my other teammates were presenting i was trying to look at it and be able to summarize for you there's no way i could do that on the fly because of how it was presented without the applicant having any ability to review it ahead of time so um i i have a question mr trump okay commercials you mentioned there was people there barbara um is there anybody there from advent health that's on the line so they're listed as they're listed as the applicant is there anybody there from advent

health system no i'm their eight i'm their and their agent of record okay so you represent the do you represent the apartment comp or department developer or advent health so i represent the apartment developer the application has to be in the name of the property owner so your rules require me to get an agent or record form from the property owner so i am an agent of record for the property owner my i represent the contract purchaser which is um cap which is mass capital okay thank you okay that goes back to the board now okay back to the boardwalk's pleasure of the board well so i i just want to since we're back to the board now i just want to uh look at a couple things i actually um being from the healthcare industry and spending a lot of time in the healthcare industry um understand how to you know look up in the florida department of health database and talk about nurse licenses so that was brought up earlier so just for the for the board um in the zip code three three five four four four five four three three nine three seven four seven that's around the area they're actually four thousand seven hundred and fifty five active rn license and lpn license so there's no shortage when you talk about a hospital next door because they they brought that up the apartment developer brought it up the applicant brought it up about 250 employees there that are 240 250 employees will encompass physicians nurses whether it be armin's lpns as well as therapists as well as cnas um in addition to a very large majority of clerical staff billing et cetera um so there's no shortage of rns and lpns that live nearby i just wanted to be able to respond to that um i don't know i could go on for a while but i don't know if anybody else has any other comments before i continue on defer to you first do it pray for me okay um and if you look at if terry i guess i need staff back up for a second if you don't mind or somebody from staff i'm terry if you don't mind if you go back to show us the um map of the proposed project that also includes the corner of bruce b downs in 54 and which intersects like wesley chapel boulevard bar speed downs 54. you can if you just bring up one of the maps of the project i think you have that road included that intersection included are you referring to the map of the mpuds with the circles sir no no no the the whether wherever you you showed the project whether it's your

your slide i think it's yeah your slide of the project yeah that shows the loan bruce be downs todd that'll be in the um in this project's presentation so not the workshop presentation but the very first one we did okay we're trying to get it up yeah the the one that was yeah so for planning commission and here and everything in fact all right i just want to i just want to show the red for a second uh next slide slide here's one type of map you want the area gosh we don't have a one more all right let me get my glasses on that's the okay that's perfect thank you so much okay so if you see where the project the proposed project is located it does front um bruce b downs i know they kept mentioning it for some reason they said it fronted commercial but there's no it doesn't find any commercial it's bruce b downs right there um if you go towards west utah boulevard and state road 54 i don't i would assume they're going to have a their ingress egress they're going to use eagleston boulevard to come out so we talk about traffic and the dangers in that area at that corner currently right now there's no saying no right right now there's no signal you have to cross through four lanes of traffic and then go through that median now going to wesley chapel boulevard and state road 54 i think each and every one of us have heard if not maybe commissioner fitzpatrick hasn't yet but you will um the dangers of that intersection of 54 in western chapel boulevard the amount of traffic that piles up it makes it impossible across the street at publix to get out so you have to leave publix and cross a median while traffic is backed up you can't get it out of there it's impossible so when it comes from a traffic and a safety and a public safety perspective it's a terrible terrible location in my opinion at this time now in the future in the future there could be a traffic signal there i'm aware of f talking about it but we're talking about right now and right now there isn't um so that highly con that highly concerns me so i have you know when we talked about in in mr stein center even kind of brought it up earlier today and and i know when we have um land use items that some of us object to we want to make sure we that we're citing land development code and and or the comprehensive plan when we're making these decisions so i've done that today so i'm going to

make emotions in ip83 oh can i okay well can i make a question well i i don't want to do it under discussion let's still have i mean i have questions for the applicant well we already went past that question for the app i haven't had my say on this no i mean did we leave the questions well can you um so let me go ahead and say some things can you put that map back up please um so i met with the applicant and it's it was at my request that they put that connection to eggleston because uh with the hospital coming um and anticipation of people being employed there plus the other employment sites all around this like the car dealers and the mall here it was my desire that the people who may live here could access the employment sites without going on booster downs so i asked that connection to be made to eggleston is there a connection there well it's on their on their psych plan they show a road i'm going to eggleston um uh over here see up here to at the very top to the right that i mean so that would allow for them to continue on and connect to eggleston upper right hand corner at the top right so it also allow when this piece comes in for development and i'm sure this is going to be commercial um because it's a it's not right here um that the people in the apartments here could access by walking um whatever happens when this gets developed uh could you put the map up please that commissioner moore had with the yellow arrows pointing to the multi-family coming in the area because i have a question for terry on that one so it's zone that that isn't there yet it's already has the entitlement did you put the map up with the yellow line yes ma'am we're working on it okay yeah so we were just told that this was um another apartment complex but from what i saw on the applicant's site that is a multi-fam that is a senior alf nope that's not it the seniors the seniors already almost built that's a different parcel that parcel is built in multi-family the senior that would be the different it's different they have an alf a sniff and possibly some il that's almost completed they're actually taking applications now that is that south of there um if you just zoom out a little bit i don't know it's down okay so you see where well now you got to look at

um this right here it's this construction right here that's a construction the road separates it right here yeah that right there see there that's during construction is that considered multi-family or is that something different different they re-zone that property away from that family it's considered differently definitely okay um for me i didn't see this as a bad site for apartments i'm certainly not going to put single-family homes uh fronting bruce be downs um there's employment opportunities all around them then they could get to without ever going on um there's be downs if they use that back road um you got the highway right there who wants to listen you know that's not going to be fancy homes back there um so i i was okay with this i am interested in seeing the total amount of units within a certain area and i if it's only one point would you say terry one point for what how many that's counting in the in this market area there was one point three percent what one point five one percent is zone multi-family in the south market area market yeah so you know multifamily is many things and i think that's a low appropriate number i deal with people who are trying to find um housing and have it it's very difficult so i'm not sure that this area is overbuilt for this price point um i think most of the housing around here is actually very expensive so uh it's in proximity to two big transportation corridors and 75. for those reasons i'm i'm okay with it but i am looking forward to a workshop to go into um everything more in detail in the future yeah commissioner commissioner oh oh commissioner mariano excuse me you know when i look at when we try to set up mpuds and developments we're looking for about creating pretty much an mpd when i look at right on an arterial with the connection that we have right there it it screams for something commercial a job creator maybe there's some type of thing i'm gonna bank right next to it who knows what can be there but on that road when you look at seven oaks probably the best development in the nation maybe uh the mudder numbers they have exceed what we put on our own standards they do so well at it and with that community being directly next to it with apartments still available uh definitely would be more applicable i know it's not the same mpuds not the same dri but what i'm saying is to throw that much more residential in

an area where the commission will how many years we struggle if you have any events at saddlebreaker coming down from 5254 try to get past that intersection you're done it would take me more time to go from hudson to get to that intersection to get to saddlebrook than it did from that point right there so the traffic's phenomenal the diverging diamond down the road that's going to be a way he's coming the intersection right down to the south is is booming to throw more residential traffic when we're trying to create jobs in this community and trying to create uh less trips it doesn't seem same right when i look at us-19 more more fatalities than anywhere as far as the roadway goes part of it was you had six lanes or even eight lanes of road going up and down and people who kind of drew u-turns to come back and around so whether they're gonna make the u-turn to get back down or taking the light at eagleston there's going to be more traffic when you look at the neighborhood of seven oaks if people are going to come in and they're going to try to avoid that big intersection one way or the other they may be going through that neighborhood a lot more and trying to get trigger guest sam's down there you can have 30 cars in line you're still stuck out there so you get a community that's been built very well right beside it you're going to take this one little parcel that's here designed for commercial and put more residential i just don't think it fits i think there's a lot of adverse effects between property values between traffic uh the congestion health safety welfare of the community that i yeah i won't be supporting this thank you go ahead um so you kind of said things backwards because we just learned that with this kind of um use there's less that's on there's me down that would be if it's commercial and that that actually would not be a good place for commercial uh because it's too far for the main intersection that's just strip zoning but it might be a good place for office but i wouldn't say commercial um well if i could commission isn't there another road coming that's going to relieve bruce b downs that goes up and connects to state road 54 that hasn't been built yet but it's coming years from now there's been several years probably 20 years maybe there's a road coming off the downs it goes around and connects to 54. a year and a half i mean this won't be built for a year so about the same time the road will probably be no the roads are about 20 years from now 20

years we will also have another interchange on state road on a us on 75 that will also relieve the traffic down below on overpass so um and there's boost be down is it an f road now we're passionate but but but i get to objectively record i do get to speak yes yeah we can't rebuttal we're just we just seem like we're beating us too much we need to just go forward so we don't rebuttal when we're having in commissioner's discussion i get to object for the records commissioners it's not you cannot cut her off when she speaks i don't know what happened she lost you barbara well that's because you keep i keep getting cut off which i need to object to the record i'm an attorney here you can can you hear me nobody's cutting you off barbara continue with your objection yeah i know you can hear me now but but staff keeps cutting me off i can see it on my end so my all right can you hear me now yeah we've been here again yes okay all right so i have a couple things i need to say so when commissioner moore states he's not summarizing any testimony of anybody who's appeared before you he's after my public hearing is closed after i've had the opportunity to speak he's presenting new facts to you we don't have access to eagleson um we're not commissioner starkey has a question he's not allowed to ask me which is the level service on brief be down to the sea and and i also want to say the whole presentation that preceded ours which is really a workshop presentation if you all want to have your workshop and get the facts a lot of stuff that's going on here today we're not opposed to a continuous so that you can get your facts and make sure that everybody on the board understands the facts mr fitzpatrick wasn't on the board first went to the last workshop so i i'm not trying i just want to be fair to you all but also fair to my client and it's been a little bit of a difficult hearing i i know for myself and my client so i wanted to get that out there and um and say that so i appreciate you giving me the time to do that thank you mr chairman just mr moore just going back we talked about eos i say there wasn't access to eagles and i said eagles was dangerous you can get on you get on eagleston and if you go across eagleston across those four lanes there's a medium there there's no traffic signal so it makes it dangerous let's go from eagleston across the street

and go to bruce me downs if you're going towards wesley chapel boulevard select to get to the to get to the hospital to get the other that's the opposite i'm talking about going left right that would be good okay real quick with the eagles at the top north east area that miss commissioner starkey had mentioned they don't own that property so we're gonna allow them to add a street there to so they're not cutting across brisbane downs ever it's all going they're all gonna go come out of the neighborhood onto eagleson they're not going to be going directly onto right now it's an internet it it amounts to being an inner neighborhood tie it's a connection it's shown on their site plan but unless they had the permission of the adjacent property owner they can't they're not going to be able to to make that that connection so there's only one way in and out but mr chairman my my point was no matter what i mean they can that's fine they i mean they make that's something they work out with you know the adjacent land owner if you go on eagleston and you want to go north on a brew speed north on bruce b downs you have to cross two lanes across the median to turn left if you come out eagles and there's no other way to go through there you have to i mean if you're on eagleston if you hang a right you're not crossing you're not crossing obviously right it's a right turn you're in the lanes if you go left you have to cross the two lanes or three two lanes of traffic go across the meeting hang the left there's no single that was the point i made one anyone who comes into this property is gonna have to get in whether it's commercial residential office and the least impact on traffic is the residential so that argument doesn't fly if you're going to use that reason that can be taken it's not an argument i'm just telling you the facts it wasn't that's not that's not listening the fact is there's less traffic with the apartment complex than any other use okay knives of office not of office mr chairman yeah sure yeah and just to clarify when i said i i didn't say trips i said congestion and i'm talking about the people that are going in that apartment they're gonna be traveling through seven oaks that otherwise normally wouldn't go through your regular commercial traffic if they're going in and out of there will come off bruce be downs from 54 56 wherever it may be getting in there i'm just talking about the congestion for the resident beside it there'll be

there will be more traffic going through that neighborhood than it is currently and again that's back to do we want to create employment jobs or we look for more residential mr chairman yeah and that's a good okay we're in discussion um that's a good point [Music] mr chamber just wait a minute barbara i mean we're when we're we're here when we're here in a regular public hearing and we're having discussion or discussion amongst commissioners we don't have staff or or applicants running up to the podium talking this is our time now right am i not correct you don't make up facts it's very unusual for me to watch a commission make up facts we actually have an expert that actually could give you the real facts mr mr at this point they're they're in commissioner discussion barbara so um i'm gonna make a motion to deny this but it has nothing to do with it it's not going to point to what i just talked about at all there's we were talking about we the points we're just making which is a fact going across the road you cross two lanes of highway i mean it's it's right there right so the applica the application is inconsistent with section 402.3 f1 of the land development code and policy flu 1.8.7 of the comprehensive plan economic development because the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed conditional use for multi-family will contribute more to the county and revenue that it will consume and services relative to the non-residential uses allowing by the existing c2 zoning number two the application is inconsistent with section 402.3 f 0.1 of the land development code and policy 1.8.10 of the company has a plan preservation of capacity for employment generating uses because the proposed conditional use for multi-family will consume land and transportation casper that has the county must ensure is available for employment generating land uses number three the application is inconsistent with sections 402.3 f.2 and 402 0.3 point um f 0.4 and 402.3 point f 0.8 of the lay development code because the proposed conditional use will add more students to an elementary school that is already at the capacity and right at capacity and increased traffic or parking and congestion around the elementary school therefore the proposed multi-film use would adversely affect the quality of life

and safety safety of those students and employees at that elementary school although the application has not met its burden of demonstrating consistency with the land development code and comprehensive plan for the reasons i previously stated the evidence also demonstrates that denying the proposed conditional use and retaining the existing c2 zoning will serve legitimate public purposes including preservation of the county's algolorum tax base preservation of land and transportation capacity for employment generating land uses i.e economic development and ensuring the safety of the students and employees of the elementary school that's my motion i'll second with a little discussion and i have discussions is there a second to this motion second okay so my discussion would be on the signature sheet which the chairman's going to be looking at i got a motion in a second but yeah we had a discussion right now along with that chairman's gonna have to sign the sheet the signatures that we have it talks about the proposed conditional use will adversely affect or contribute to the derivation of the quality of life of property guys in the immediate neighborhood number four the proposed conditional use will create excessively increased traffic or parking congestion as well as affect public safety in number eight the proposed conditional use will that will adversely affect the health safety and welfare of the strong community or area wow i think you all are treasure total troubled water i wonder if the attorney can speak up but we already have testimony from the school school representative on the planning commission this will not affect adversely affect the schools that there's capacity we um i don't know how you how that you said it's going to affect the health of anyone around them when this is less traffic on boost be downs than any other use what was the other thing that you threw out there what was the other we have a motion in this second so i mean i know well i think obviously you're gonna obviously you're going the other way very elitist and improper we're signing 000 abilities community and i you know we're we get we're going down this path that i think is really dangerous rude inappropriate and i i and you know i i think we should continue this i think you presented a lot of information that might have been confusing to some and that we need to have be able to talk more in a workshop setting because obviously some people aren't understanding that what you were saying

and i i would like to suggest that we continue this and and i don't think the applicant was able to really present the way they would have liked and i just think this is a travesty here today and i'd love to see if we might come one more time well i would like to see it pipe in right here i felt like i was in a workshop again with and we're actually here online 83 and i don't know why we're such into that but um i think the project fits i think the project is good i don't think the traffic would be a problem i don't think there's going to be any issues with the schools and i think it fits in the neighborhood of uh where it's located and if it's a puzzle it's a very good project far as i'm concerned well mr chairman since we're in discussion you know you know i signed a land development code multiple times i understand and the company has to play multiple times yeah so so there's a motion there's a motion in second okay i have a motion if i may since the commissioner asked the the criteria cited by commissioner moore i believe is defensible i don't know that there was any competent substantial evidence about transportation issues that commissioner mariano was adding to the motion um but the but the uh criteria within the land development code about economic development and and in 402.3 um is what that provision what those provisions say mr mariano i'll withdraw my addition to the motion do one now i'll withdraw my addition to the motion okay so it's just my motion as it stands yep your motion is standing seconded i've got a motion and a second to deny this project i don't know what this is all those in favor say i did you vote the motion on the floor is for denial denial of the conditional use they've already got c2 zoning they need this conditional use to get multifamily on this site and so that's what they are before you today for so if you vote no we'll under explain to her if you vote yes it's dead if you vote no it goes forward that's well no if you vote if you vote right yes on the motion it is denied if it if you vote so there would have to be a second motion to approve right but that's after with this movement right yeah do i need to restate my motion again that's right the commissioner moore did

not did not put on the floor staff recommendation what commissioner it was it was number three of the memo which said you may deny this conditional use that's what the commissioner's motion was and so that's what you're voting on can you repeat the motion just like the main gist of it well so then you yeah that's fine i'll talk slower i know i will fast sometimes so my motion is to deny my motion is to deny the application and i cited four reasons why and do what mr steinstein said i read over them again what's your call that's up to you that's or if you would like me to read over again commissioner i'm happy to okay so i cited four reasons why the only development code and the comprehensive plan why it should be denied and that was my motion no you're voting i don't know i'm not going to deny it at this point so you're voting against the motion that's on the floor which is to deny it what what that's you're going with yourself you're growing with commissioner starkey and commissioner oakley not with commissioner mariano and mr and now we have to have another vote is that correct well we're trying to be sure of her votes oh you're doing that again i'm going to call robert's role she voted no well you voted no he's an adult and she voted no okay and now we have to i do agree with the project because it's next to well that's your advent health i mean the hospital and it's in walking distance so it's to not create more right you voted right when you said no you voted for for that reason with the with the names okay mr chairman question um unless we continue to do this again i'm going to move to continue 60 days the next time i'm back over here i'll second that motion since we seem to have come to i understand a little confusion at the end i have no problems continuing okay well well i got a motion a second to continue the item okay i'd like to ask clarification from the county attorney because this is uncharted territory um so if we have voted to deny um we haven't what what does it take to approve their request you'd have to vote against the motion to continue and then you could vote to approve or then you could make another motion to approve but the motion that the motion that's on the floor right now