PDD-23-0001

Every appearance1 of 1 are in a recording

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 85% of 724 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1. 1Oct 11, 2022
   Board of County CommissionersP79Public hearingApproved

   Approved minutes

   Approved the item per Staff’s recommendation with Commissioner Moore and Commissioner Mariano voting nay.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 1:32:00
   ▶ 1:32:002h 42m

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:00Two start. And we are on P7.

   Oakley

   1:32:07No. Nine? Seventy-nine.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:10And Terry, you

   Oakley

   1:32:11were? Yeah, but it's special.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:15Oh there you go. Ms. Pitos, uh please. Do you need to do anything to him? I do. I need to do something very important for the record. Thank you, Mr. Petas. Uh P seventy nine was published in Tampa Times on September twenty-first, twenty twenty two.

   Oakley

   1:32:33Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh item P79 is a zoning amendment uh in the name of Seven Oak's MPUD Master Plan Unit Development Parcel S 19 by S D. Wesley Chapel LLC. It's a rezoning request from an MPUD Master Plan Unit Development to an M PUD Master Plan Unit Development to modify the master plan to allow the conversion of retail commercial entitlements to multifamily entitlements on parcel S 19. I'm going to keep my presentation brief today, uh given that much of my presentation is already on the record from the January 11,

   1:33:032022 Board of County Commissioners meeting, which is also why I've uh included the previous case numbers on the slide that's on the overhead, along with today's case number slide uh that's on the slide. So the applicant previously proposed to modify the 7-Oaks MPUD to add multifamily as an alternate use on parcel S19 by utilizing a land use equivalency matrix. Currently,

   1:33:33the allowed primary use on S-19 is retail, and the alternate use is office. Um the applicant previously modified the proposal for the Southern Oak S MPD, which was uh I believe, yes, which was heard in January earlier this year, to add both multifamily and 20,000 square feet of commercial retail office space on S19 as a vertically integrated mixed-use building. And the Planning Commission at that time, in the in the previous hearings, voted five to one to recommend approval

   1:34:04of the modified mixed use proposal. And on January eleventh, twenty twenty two, the Board of County Commissioners voted three two to deny the project and then the project went into mediation.

   1:34:17So post mediation, uh in other words today, the applicant continued with the modified proposal For the 7 Oak MPUD and added with the add with the commercial retail office, added the multifamily and continues to recommend or propose a vertically integrated mixed-use building. Uh, with the following updates, as I've noted on the board, the four bullets. They've increased the minimum retail office commercial entitlement from 20,000 square feet to 25,000

   1:34:47square feet. They reduced the number of parking deviations to the land development code because more vertical parking is made available within the updated version of the project. They have committed to the site plan building configuration of the site, which the applicant will speak to, and also to pedestrian safety, traffic calming features on the central. Drive vial that separates the parcel from the north half and the south half. And

   1:35:17they have agreed to work with uh SAMS Club or Walmart to extend the pedestrian walkway safety improvements across the site so that it's not just in front of uh their two buildings on the north and south, but also extend uh eastward into the Walmart property.

   1:35:37Provided that that they agree with to it.

   1:35:41Um this is uh just a brief reminder in terms of where this is located, right off of State Road 56 and Ancient Oaks Boulevard. It's the property

   1:35:51Uh highlighted in the red here.

   1:35:57Uh it is zoned M P U D. Located in a Res3 feature land use.

   1:36:07This is the location of parcel S19 and the overall Seven Oaks MPUD, all the way at the south end by uh State Route 56. And and uh Busby Downs on the uh east. So and and some some of the history here. Um this was part of a DRI previously and the MPD was modified several times in the past uh to uh uh uh revise primary and alternate approved uses on uh uh on the associated land use

   1:36:37equivalency matrix. The most recent substantial modification was in November of twenty nineteen to all the brewery that went just east or west on you on State road fifty six.

   1:36:49Uh as it was originally uh proposed, the modifications to the MPT were found to be inconsistent with the provisions of the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan. This was when the project was only proposing multi-family. Um by January of twenty twenty two The Planning and Development Department sought found it consistent with the comprehensive plan through the use of the vertically integrated mixed use building strategy that incorporated the commercial and office entitlements into the project. The BCC, however, found it

   1:37:20consistent at that time. As it is currently proposed, the project remains similar and familiar to what was seen in January of 2022. With increased non-residential square footage in the vertically integrated mixed use building concept, reduced parking variations, which is an improvement over what was previously brought forward, and enhanced pedestrian experiences along the east-west drive aisle that separates the property into the north and south halves.

   1:37:52Uh this is just uh a repeat from from January. I won't go through it all, but in general the uh a s a third, if you will, revenue model analysis was not conducted um for this case because that uh in in January we were looking at twenty thousand square feet and found it to be um the analysis indicated neg negligible revenue differences over the ten year average and so by adding more uh to the total square footage for a commercial office

   1:38:23um it was not going to change a recommendation that had already been made for approval. Um

   1:38:34These are some of the policies that we discussed back in January. I won't go through all of them. They're part of the presentation. Um again some of the policies and ideas that were discussed back in January as a reminder to the to the board and to the public of what was of what we talked about. These being some of the land development code items uh and how they were addressed. And then finally, uh we stand before the board today recommending approval with conditions. However,

   1:39:05there are options associated with this project. As always, there is the option to deny the proposal, and then there's also the option to direct yet another course of action for the project. And with that I will complete my presentation. Oh, I should mention too that we have received uh many, many uh ex parte communications from all the different board members. Uh these have been compiled and submitted to board records by staff.

   StarkeyChair

   1:39:33Thank you. Okay. Can the applicant present please? Thank you.

   Joel

   1:39:44Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh Joel II, to an associates, Palm Harbor, Florida. I am land use counsel for the property owner and the applicant, which is S. D. Wesley Chapel LLC. As the Chair will recall, I was granted 15 minutes, and I have been sworn. Thank you. And I was granted 15 minutes for initial presentation, five minutes for Rebuttal, but just uh as Mr. Pitos did, I'm going to be absolutely as brief as possible.

   1:40:15Um, this is a proposed mediation settlement pursuant to section 70.51 of Florida statutes, which provides a specific procedural mechanism to resolve zoning disputes prior to going to

   1:40:34We went through the full process uh The mediator allowed the CDD and other interested parties to participate. So we had discussions with staff, the CDD and other representatives in the process. We did come to terms of agreement. with your county staff for proposed settlement. Those terms were rejected by the other participants. But pursuant to the statute at the end of the day it's between the property owner who has the property

   1:41:04rights and the county. to decide the terms of the settlement. The other parties obviously have the right to speak uh but not a right to be a party to the settlement.

   1:41:16This and it is very important. We we we've been to the Planning Commission twice. We spoke with you once in a very lengthy hearing. I am not going to rehash all of that hearing, but I'm going to very briefly summarize the key points just to refresh recollections and in anticipation of some of the arguments that may be may be made in opposition. It's important to note what this is, and Mr. Pitos alluded to this. The underlying matter is a

   1:41:46master plan modification only. It is simply a map change. It is not an MPD rezoning. It's not a change in the zoning. It is simply a map modification, as he explained, The map has a table that has permitted and alternate uses for parcels. And this is simply a map change that would also allow the multifamily use on this parcel as part of a mixed use vertically

   1:42:17integrated configuration. Now, having said what it is, that it's just simply a map change Let me tell you five things that it the proceeding is not. And this is critical to the arguments being made against us. Number one, it is not a rezoning. for a new density or new entitlements. The approved vested DRI. An approved vested MPUD already approves

   1:42:471,726 multifamily units within the MPD. 1726, which may be apartments. Secondly Only five hundred eighty eight Of those multifamily units have been constructed to this day. In seven ox. Therefore If you add our additional 320 units to the

   1:43:17558 which have been built, If we're approved and constructed, there will still only be eight hundred seventy-eight multifamily units. And if you divide eight hundred seventy-eight by the seventeen hundred twenty-six approved, You will find that we still will only be at fifty point eight percent, five zero point eight percent. of the allowed multifamily units that the board previously has specifically approved.

   1:43:48as vested entitlements for this DRI. Secondly It is not the introduction of a new f a new multifamily product. As I just stated. Apartments were approved from the get-go. in Seven Oaks and not only apartments, but a lot of apartments. Think about seventeen hundred and twenty-six apartments that were approved. Everyone who moved into Seven Oaks knew there was a master plan and knew there was a zoning for a mix of uses

   1:44:18that could include seventeen hundred and twenty-six apartments. It is disingenuous to now say. That no one anticipated apartments in the MPD. In fact, there are two existing multifamily parcels constructed, one just north of us and one west of us, that are within the MPUD. Interestingly They both are on the perimeter of the MPUD, just as we are. They're not internal to what you would consider the internal single family detached

   1:44:49neighborhood. With that said, there are existing approved multifamily parcels internal to the MPUD. There are parcels that are approved and designated for apartments interior. So if having apartments interior with traffic coming to apartments is okay. Why would apartments on the exterior that's not bringing those trips into your single-family subdivision, why would those be objectionable? Thirdly

   1:45:21This is not the first land use equivalency matrix conversion. to be proposed in seven oaks. The land use equivalency matrix, which as you recall, allows you to change between unit between uses based on a predetermined Institute of Traffic Engineers formula Has been done Seventeen times. In seven ooks. Sixteen of those were done before

   1:45:52we applied. One has even been done since we applied. Can I interrupt

   StarkeyChair

   1:45:57you for one second?

   Joel

   1:46:01Seven Oaks. Seventeen times. In Seven Oaks. And, more importantly, they were all done administratively. No one came and asked you, Mother, may I? Because under the DRI, there is an absolute right to make those conversions. Okay. I provided a legal memorandum. When we started this requesting that conversion and that it be done administratively, That was denied for the stated reason that, oh, you can't do it because The

   1:46:31map doesn't say you can do apartments there. But there's no question about the right to be able to do the loom conversion in my legal opinion and I submit a legal memorandum on that. Point number four. And this is the segue to the loom conversion. Port point number four. There will not be There will not be any increase in traffic. And let me explain that. The land use equivalency matrix, as I said, by definition.

   1:47:03is based upon a one to one equivalent trip conversion. So by definition Whatever number of apartments you propose matches exactly these same trips. that the equivalent square feet of retail one predicts. So when you invoke the loom, the whole purpose for that is to make sure it is traffic neutral. So all the arguments today that we're going to generate more traffic is simply empirically, professionally untrue.

   1:47:33It's false. Your traffic engineers will tell you that the loom is based on a one-to-one trip equivalency. And the square feet we're converting to the apartments ensures that the 320 apartments will equal exactly the trip generation that the retail would have generated. Now in this case, our project will generate Less traffic. Than if the full allowed retail was developed. And the reason for that is we don't require all of the retail

   1:48:04square footage to convert to the 320 units. We will still be leaving retail square footage theoretically on the table. Now it's not going to get used in parcel S19 because we're using up all the land. So we'll only have the three twenty apartments and the twenty five thousand square feet. But we absolutely as a scientific truth Will not generate More daily trips than would have been generated if it was all retail will

   1:48:34generate less. Fifth and last

   1:48:40We are not An increase in the reasonably anticipated use or demand upon the CDD facilities. And let me explain that. It goes back to what we've already talked about. When the CDD was established, there was an approved vested MPUD that authorized 1,726 apartments. Okay? So whatever C D facilities That whomever decided to design and build, they

   1:49:10built that knowing how many units this board had approved for that project. even if our apartments are built. again you will only be at fifty percent Of what reasonably was anticipated under the zoning approval to be accommodated by the CDD. Our parcel in fact is in the CDD. We have C D D assessments. Mr. Gelder's company is going to have to write a check for that assessment, and it includes permanent

   1:49:41ongoing operating and maintenance assessments. So he is going to have to pay in perpetuity just like everyone else. With that said, Even though they certainly reasonably should have contemplated the units that were vested and approved, With that said, we're going to have very minimal impact They're going to have the best of both worlds. They're going to get stock developments assessment checks. But because of the nature of this project, which you've seen with

   1:50:11our specific targeted amenities, our high-end luxury amenities. Most of those residents, most of the time, are going to use those facilities that are built for them on that site. May a few people occasionally go to the other facility or go walk a trail? Sure. But in terms of the main impact on your recreational facilities, we simply are not going to add much to that. And and to the extent we do We're a mandatory member of the CDD.

   1:50:42We have to pay our money. We're going to pay our money. And so we have the right to do that. And that can't be done heights. Now that's what we aren't. And the reason I say that is please don't get Misled By arguments That tried to argue points that simply are empirical adopted facts. Now, as Terry did to save a whole bunch of time going through history, I want to go

   1:51:12directly to our proposal. But before I do that, just for the record, I need to incorporate by reference the prior binder of exhibits that we introduced in the record at the Planning Commission on September 19th of 2021 by reference, the addendum binder that we introduced at the Planning Commission on December the 9th of 2021. All of the uh Transcript of the prior hearings And all of the testimony at the prior hearings, which you heard in January.

   1:51:43I just want to make sure the record's clear that we're incorporating by reference all of that information. And the last thing I have, which I submitted to PDD last week when it arrived, but it was after your agenda package. So Mr. Pitos asked that I introduce a copy with the board clerk. Yeah Terry talked about the economic impact comparisons that even at the twenty thousand square feet it basically was an even basis between the mixed use project and if it was purely retail.

   1:52:13We did have uh Tom Lavache at WTL who testified to you previously and who has been an economic consultant for the county. He updated his report. at the twenty five thousand square feet plus the three hundred and twenty units, uh that shows the further increase of revenue and jobs over obviously what would have been generated at twenty thousand. So if the board would be kind enough to receive and file, I'll just give this to the clerk. Second.

   StarkeyChair

   1:52:41All in favor? Aye.

   Joel

   1:52:47Now with that said, the important thing is what have we done since January to hopefully convince three or more of you that this project in fact is what Pasco County wants, what it's asked for, and what it should encourage.

   1:53:09As you know, it's an urban infield site. Just as a reminder, those are professional offices to the north. Those are not residential, professional offices to the north and the northwest. Sam's club to the east. Multifamily to the northeast and to the west just off the screen multifamily. So we're surrounded by multifamily, professional office, retail, and multifamily. So there is no serious question about compatibility. At

   1:53:40all.

   1:53:48Most of you have seen this. This is the central drive aisle, how it will look. This is not a hypothetical. Uh between the January hearing and now, while we were doing the mediation, Mr. Gelder paid his architect to design the buildings and to design This is how that central drive out will look under the terms of the new conditions of approval. It will have parking on the street to help calm traffic.

   1:54:18It will have the dedicated bike lanes. It is extra wide as you can see. That streetscaping is mandatory. We'll talk about that in a moment. And the whole idea is to create the sense of place. And Two Help calm the traffic. Here are the summary of the changes. As I said, we've reduced the retail office component from 20,000 to 25. Why did that happen? Two reasons. We heard you loud and clear that you wanted us to maximize the

   1:54:48employment portion of this that could fit in the building. Keith told you back in January that he only had he only had so much room in the building. This will max out the first. floor of that main building. Um We've added the streetscape and the traffic calming. We're committed, and this is critical because this is mandatory vertical mixed use. This is mandatory structured parking. This isn't if or maybe. That that structured parking has allowed us to eliminate

   1:55:18the the parking deviations which were an issue for some of you. Understandably last time you were concerned about why are we granting parking deviations? By doing structured parking, we've been able to reduce that.

   StarkeyChair

   1:55:31How much more do you have, Joel?

   Joel

   1:55:33Uh two minutes. Literally. One one minute.

   StarkeyChair

   1:55:35Okay, one minute, one minute, speed fast.

   Joel

   1:55:37We'll do.

   StarkeyChair

   1:55:38Because I I a I asked him a question.

   Joel

   1:55:40Okay. So the pedestrian features going to number seven, and this is important. Uh and you've all seen this in the conditions. We have a high visibility crosswalks, we have pedestrian and vehicular warning signage, we have pedestrian activated push button signals, and they will light up the lights in the pavers for the crossing at night. and we have the raised roadway paper crosswalks. Uh again, it is site plan specific. You don't see this in MPD rezoning. We are committing

   1:56:10to this specific site plan. This specific building configuration, the specific building design, and these specific pedestrian enhancements. So with that said, that's the proposal. Your Planning Commission recommended approval before. Your planning department has reiterated its recommendation of approval. We think we've addressed the pedestrian safety concerns from the prior hearing and we respectfully request uh your approval. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   1:56:40Okay, um is there are there any questions for the applicant?

   Moore

   1:56:44I wonder I I do have just one at this time and I'll I'll just wait for public um comment. Mr Two go go back one slide for me what was

   1:56:54Oh I'm sorry, apologize. One more. I I I can't do it.

   Joel

   1:56:58That one? This one or

   Moore

   1:57:00another

   Joel

   1:57:01one?

   Moore

   1:57:02Which one you want? Oh, is it not is it to go off again? This one? Oh, I'm sorry. Um no, I'm sorry. Uh one more there, thank you. I appreciate it. Um Let's go number eight. Committed to off site pedestrian safety measures substance to Sam's Club approval. When I had my meeting Last week I think it was? Last week, okay. With Terry and David. Um they had mentioned this, but you were you were waiting on a letter from Walmart Corporate. Has that come in yet?

   Joel

   1:57:31Yeah, sir. I uh sent David a response on that either yesterday or today. We sent the letter initially to the contact person we had. and they said that to get a formal review they had to have two things. They had to have detailed plans to show exactly what we were talking about doing on their crosswalk. and we had to show them that we had county approval for the project. They did not want to approve something that you had not approved. So

   1:58:02it's kind of a chicken and an egg. Um and the other thing is that uh we absolutely, and Keith Gelder can address this, we're absolutely committed, I want to show you what they have now.

   1:58:18Here's what we're talking about. See the they have the designated crosswalks. This is the end of our property. That's the central tribile. They have the crosswalk marked in the in the asphalt. They have the handicap ramp for the sidewalk all the way to the front door. What we're talking about doing is getting them to let us put the raised pavers in the park going to cross. their drive hour and denoting that with the same type of of you know notification

   1:58:48system. Uh but the short answer is they said you gotta give us the exact plan details and you gotta show us that Pasco County approves this. I talked to David about this. I firmly believe That's something that will only improve safety on their site. and help them control liability on their site. Surely their corporate counsel at the end of the day and their business people, if persuaded by mister Goldstein and myself, will see fit to prove that. But with that said,

   1:59:19we can't legally go work on their land that we don't own. if they don't give us that permission, we we're gonna do everything in our power to get them to agree to that.

   Moore

   1:59:29Pull-up question, Madam Chair. So Mr Tuk just you mentioned p the plan details, the um yeah the plan details, I guess the architectural

   1:59:44Drawings or details that would need to be

   Joel

   1:59:46construction plan. That would be submitted to the county. See, that's the other thing. The county is gonna have to approve a construction plan and issue a permit for that walk on that work on SAMS Claw.

   Moore

   1:59:57Yeah. So I guess that's just my question if if um You know, that's one of the things obviously um you guys are selling today, you know right, to to uh try to gain approval. It if the plans aren't drawn up yet, you couldn't submit them to SAMS, so why didn't I why weren't they drawn up and submitted to SAMS as part of your offer previously, because it doesn't sound like you're ready for prime time yet.

   Joel

   2:00:21We showed them, what we showed them is we showed them this exact crossing. that we're constructing on our property. and we told them that we want to construct the same crossings at each of their drive aisles in their sidewalk. So we did provide them exactly the same thing that's in your zoning approval. And the reason is we don't we won't even have construct detailed construction plans for our site. until we have this approval. I mean you have to

   2:00:51have zoning approval to draw detailed construction plans. But I understand what you're saying. I I think this is the tail on the dog. Um I've never had a zoning approval in Pasco County in 25 years. That had a requirement for off-site construction on someone else's land unless that person agreed. Now we've had to do it on public property.

   Moore

   2:01:15No, I'm with you.

   Joel

   2:01:17So it's a volunteer I guess my point is it's an additional voluntary enhancement that we have an obligation to do everything in our power in concert with the county to get them to let us build this. I can't imagine. Imagine Sam's Club's gonna tell you no, you as a county. If they want to develop Walmarts and Sam Clubs in Pasco County, I mean that would be foolish. But I can't I can't I can't speak for them.

   Moore

   2:01:43I'll I'll just come back later. I just have another question on that, but I wanna I wanna get to public comment. Okay,

   Joel

   2:01:47thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:01:49Okay. Um we have a lot of people signed up. We do but I think there's a certain order that our um public speakers wish to There is a group for a

   StarkeyChair

   2:02:01per uh uh for an order, but they wanna go towards the end.

   2:02:06Good luck. Thank you. All right. Um the first that I have up is Theodore Rhodes. Followed by um Chelsea Waller. Um

   Theodore Rhodes

   2:02:24Oh you

   StarkeyChair

   2:02:24wanna go?

   2:02:29There is there's quite a few people. So do you wanna do WebEx first? We can do WebEx first if you're going to be

   StarkeyChair

   2:02:36or you can go now and then

   Theodore Rhodes

   2:02:39We'd rather go. Never.

   StarkeyChair

   2:02:42I hear you. You don't have to speak. It's if you don't want to. Never use it.

   StarkeyChair

   2:02:48Okay, so we're gonna take those folks on WebEx. Alright, so Eric, um how about Lillian Burnett? Okay. Ms. Brennett, hold on just a moment.

   2:03:02Okay, you have been elevated. If you could state your name, address, and whether or not you've been sworn and then you can proceed.

   2:03:14Ms. Burnett, we cannot hear you. You are

   2:03:18not. One.

   2:03:22I was

   StarkeyChair

   2:03:22gonna I was kinda noticed that your mic went off.

   StarkeyChair

   2:03:27All right, can you hear me now? Okay, we can hear you. You're very low. Can you try again?

   Lillian Burnett

   2:03:33Okay.

   2:03:36Okay. My name is Lillian Burnett. I live at [address removed]. And I have been sworn in.

   StarkeyChair

   2:03:46Great, we can hear you. Go ahead and proceed.

   2:03:51Oh she has not been a little bit more. You've not okay. Wait.

   Lillian Burnett

   2:03:55None of the WebEx people have been. So

   StarkeyChair

   2:03:57Okay. We're gonna swear in all the WebEx people at one time. So If you're at home you need to raise your hand. All right.

   StarkeyChair

   2:04:06Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth? So help you, God. I do. Thank you you may proceed.

   Lillian Burnett

   2:04:19Okay. Thank you for letting me speak, Commissioners. I am urging you to vote no on the rezoning in Seven Oaks on parcel S19. Absolutely not the right location for 320 apartments. We already have traffic conditions getting into the community from State Road 56 at traffic times. The current two left turn lanes do not accommodate the growth we have experienced and create a major traffic debacle

   2:04:49and is very unsafe. There were several other residents speaking in more detail these traffic issues. The issue here is not about not wanting more apartments. It's about adding another possible six hundred and forty and specifically where these appro proposed apartments and retail would be. Personally, I am all for growth and pleased to see what has happened with the infrastructure in our once cow pasture areas. It's

   2:05:20brought jobs and opportunities. And choices for shopping and eating. I've lived in Seven Oakes for eighteen years. And I Also don't think that some of you have done perhaps your due diligence are completely familiar with the impact of changing this zoning would have on our community.

   2:05:41to keep the land the developers zoned it for commercial for a reason. to keep the landscape of the existing community to stay and remain the same with already existing commercial and professional buildings. I will say that Stock's development's renderings look beautiful, but allowing three story buildings would forever ruin the aesthetics of the entrance to Seven Oaks. My recommendation to stock development

   2:06:11would be to build one-story commercial professional buildings or to build this beautiful project that they're proposing north in Seven Oaks across from the new Bay Care Hospital. Thank you for your time.

   StarkeyChair

   2:06:27Thank you very much. Next up is Tho Doin Dowen, but please wait one moment. We can elevate you.

   2:06:43All right, you should be um ready to go. We've got you unmuted. If you can state your name, address, and whether or not you've been sworn.

   Padong Anal Bata

   2:06:52My name is Padong Anal Bata [address removed]. Um and yes, I have been sworn in And I I guess I just wanted to um I just wanted to to uh voice my opinion on the that corner. It definitely is not uh suitable for multi um level apartment building that is very, very congested area. Turning in especially during the holiday

   2:07:23season, it's impossible for me to get into Seven Oak. From the highway. from the the Bruce B down even. So and to add more apartments in that area is just not possible. Uh I I ask you to go mail on this issue. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:07:48We have Kathy Doyle is next. Just wait one moment while we elevate you.

   2:08:00Okay, you should be good to go. Um there you go. You're now unmuted.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:08:05Hi, I I wasn't really prepared to speak. I'm I'm just here to listen and support everybody in um Seven Oaks against the proposed apartments. And that's I'd all I'd like to say. Thank you. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:08:23James Cotlin, give us one moment while we elevate you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:08:43Can you hear me now?

   StarkeyChair

   2:08:44Yes we can hear you. Go proceed.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:08:47Okay. James Cotlin, 27434, Water Ash Drive within Seven Oaks. And I have been sworn. Um appreciate your time. And uh to echo some of the other comments that were made, you know, uh the attorney had addressed earlier that there was two apartment complexes within Seven Oaks. Um, but we must consider the other ones that are within that also add density to that area. They got the Enclave, Bonterra. Um, you also have the Blue Heron Assistant Living Apartments, which are Yeah.

   2:09:18Traffic is an issue, regardless of the arguments against. And it's an assumption that residents of the apartments would not use the Seven Oaks facility. So you can't base a decision on that assumption. That being said, I did want to stress the importance of keeping it commercial spaces and specifically the need for small business office spaces. My wife and I own a small business administration certified woman-owned small business, which is also

   2:09:48a certified woman-owned business enterprise in the state of Florida. We are a Department of Defense contracting company. And as such, we are required to have office space within um the Greater Tampa area to support our customers down on McDill Special Operations Command. Special Operations Command Central and then some of the others. And uh the office space requirements in this area are are are less than ideal. Um we do have corpor or uh business space located

   2:10:18in the Seven Oaks, but we've been looking for the greater part of two years to try to get space in this area. We'd like to keep it in Wesley Chapel because we uh hire in the Wesley Chapel. chapter area uh to support our business and uh rezoning this and adding additional apartments and although there's commercial space there it's not the ideal commercial space needed um for independent office spaces uh due to uh security clearance uh restrictions on space

   2:10:49and storage and whatnot. Um that is ideal in the offset business spaces that you see uh surrounding the Seven Oaks property. Uh with that said, I I appreciate your time. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:11:05Okay. We have um the last one for WebEx is Abby Mackness.

   2:11:14Give us one moment, please.

   2:11:19All right, Ms. Magnus, you should be um able to speak.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   2:11:24Thank you so much for for this opportunity. I'm Abby Magnus. I live at Twenty eight ten. Uh uh place in Wesley Chapel. Um I again I wanted to to urge

   StarkeyChair

   2:11:37you have to state whether or not you've been sworn. I have been sworn. Thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   2:11:42Thank you so much. I really appreciate uh the opportunity. Um, I I wanted to mention we are not um anti uh apartment. This is just really uh the wrong, wrong location. As others have said. The road infrastructure alone there are not going to support more apartments. The traffic there is already tremendously congested. um during rush hour either getting out or coming home or already backing up in into 56. And

   2:12:14I would say I wanted to take issue a little bit with the commercial use that the lawyer for uh the developer was stating. With commercial use, uh most businesses open uh around O'clock in the morning. That's usually after rush hour. Um, and stay open longer after people get home. So traffic patterns aren't at all the same. Again, it's um already a very dangerous intersection. um adding um more multifamily

   2:12:44housing there is only going to make it worse. And again, as others has mentioned, in Back by Bay Care, there is plenty of space within Seven Oaks there for apartment building. Be built. um without really uh congesting that area. Just wrong location. uh for this project. And I thank you very much for this time and I appreciate everything you're doing.

   StarkeyChair

   2:13:10Thank you very much and that's all we have on WebEx. So I will move back here for those that signed up. We have Theodore Rhodes.

   Theodore Rhodes

   2:13:27Thank you. I'm still surprised to be first, but Uh my name is Theodore Rhodes. I reside at [address removed]. Oh, I've been sworn. Thank you. Wesley Chapel, Florida, 33544. I would like to address two fatal flaws in the proposed Seven Oaks MPUD amendment proposal that is being considered. The first is the improper public-private regulatory responsibility. Transfer proposed.

   2:13:57It's under section 34 B13 of the revised MPUD document. And the second is the potential sky and sun blocking of the single-family residence homes to the north that could be caused by the increased height allowed by the modified MPUD provisions. As a developer, general contractor, broker, and real estate investor for over 40 years, I have never seen a public-private responsibility transferred such as

   2:14:28the one set forth in this proposal. If completed, it would undermine the well-accepted roles of public responsibilities by substituting self-serving private interests for overall public interests. Since zoning is a public duty, transferring financial responsibility for this public act appears improper at best and might be illegal. It also telegraphs the county knows that what is proposed should not be granted. Making someone else pay for a bad decision

   2:14:58does not convert it to a good one. With respect to building heights, the original MPUD provided for uses with limited height on the subject site. Hundreds of homes immediately north of the site were built and sold based on these limitations. To allow substantially higher buildings with different uses than originally approved, and that could block sunlight and add unanticipated visual obstructions to these properties long after full build out undoes the meeting

   2:15:29of planned unit development. If a developer can build under one set of rules to maximize home sales prices and then change the rules to add less desirable components after the fact, then planned unit protections would mean nothing. Commissioner Starkey cited this as the reason for her rejection of the proposed S-12 Crown office development adjacent to the clubhouse. While the incompatibility and variance issues are obvious

   2:15:59whoops, wrong page. Additionally, if approved, this revision will likely act as precedent for countless future proposals that will then be extremely difficult to decline. For the above reasons, as well as those described to be described by other speakers, including but not limited to incompatibility of proposed development, its contribution to already overburdened schools and local roads, and its lack of prescription. parks and public accommodations, the

   2:16:29proposal should be rejected. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:16:32Thank you very much. Next I have is George Fraser.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:16:46Thank you. I'm George Fraser. I live at [address removed] and I have been sworn. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity. Um I'm a sixteen year Seven Oaks resident. And I recommend it. It is my desire that the Board of County Commissioners vote to deny the parcel set S19 proposal. I believe that the county's response on January 11th of this year remains substantially the correct one. It should continue to direct development in accordance with existing decisions. Perhaps when there is no longer designated property for multifamily.

   2:17:17then consider making these types of changes. The original presentation made by my fellow community members on January eleventh and the concerns noted are mine as well. I do not believe that the proposal fits. It is not consistent with the original intent or the character of the area. The fact that variations to the LDC have to be made, meaning neighborhood parks, parkings, etcetera, does concern me. There is more demand or growth in commercial development in Pasco than multifamily housing, and

   2:17:47my hope is that the board will focus on this with their vote. If that needs to change, then may Pasco County increase its efforts into using the existing zone land to promote apartment living to fulfill the need. I ask for each of your vote in denying this proposal. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:18:05Thank you. Next up I have Jim White.

   Jim White

   2:18:16It's the day that you know. Uh my name's Jim White. I live at uh [address removed] in Brook Forest in Seven Oaks. Uh I just wanna sir first of all

   StarkeyChair

   2:18:29if you've been sworn and then have you been sworn?

   Jim White

   2:18:32No.

   StarkeyChair

   2:18:32Oh okay. Please raise your right hand. Okay.

   2:18:38Anyone else um has not been sworn? Okay, well go ahead. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, so help you God.

   Jim White

   2:18:47Yes.

   StarkeyChair

   2:18:47Thank you and proceed.

   Jim White

   2:18:49Thank you. Again, um uh from Brook Forest and I'm coming from the standpoint of uh agreeing with basically everybody that's been here so far My main concern is the the traffic. Um What I would appreciate is if you would deny this proposal and the reasons are that uh kinda go back to where I come from. I'm a San Francisco Forty Niner fan. I'm glad to be here with the Tampa Bay Bucks and be glad I'm out of the San Francisco Bay

   2:19:19Area. Now why would I say that? Because California's a beautiful place. Well it's easy because if you go back there right now you'll understand what your future may look like if we approve this kind of stuff. Now, I love Florida. This has been a great we I've we moved here in 2003. Moved into our house in January 2004. So we've been there from the very beginning, seen the growth. Conversely, I saw the growth Campbell, California,

   2:19:49San Jose, Santa Clara, Silicon Valley, lived through all of that. And I c I can tell you, um It's not about once the day that they get this project completed. It's the five, ten, fifteen years after that. 'Cause things build up, the traffic It's an absolutely terrible location to have that. I drive through there every day and I'm sure Many of you go through there as well. The traffic on fifty six Is

   2:20:21uh Well it's not as bad as some places, but it's getting Uh more congested. So you can see that's going on. Now the the good thing that I see is that there's so much land in Seven Oaks. Why does it have to be right next to Uh Sam's Club. To me that doesn't make sense. Um One thing that was brought up and I'd like to throw it out there, I don't know if You'll agree with this, but The idea that the traffic patterns for multi-use

   2:20:52family is going to be the same as uh office space or commercial. Um well if you live in these developments you realize that there's a lot of young families and those families have children and they grow up just like they did on the street that I live on. Multi-use families, they're going to have families, young children are going to grow up, there's going to be a higher density. But I think maybe the

   2:21:22biggest thing is that that's going to be a 24-7 traffic issue. With commercial, you're going to have less than that. that. They may not be open on Sundays, they're gonna have, you know, their hours, but it's not going to be twenty-four-seven. So I think that um The location is bad, traffic is gonna be a lot worse down the road, and I hope you Find a way to turn this down because There's so many other places that they could build this thing. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:21:52I w I was born in Redwood City.

   Jim White

   2:21:55Oh cool. Yeah. There's a lot of robots there. And more coming. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:22:01Thank you. Thank you. All right, Mike uh Garbit.

   StarkeyChair

   2:22:08Redwood City is uh just south of San Francisco, New San Mateo.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   2:22:16Uh Mike Garbot. Uh I'm at [address removed], Wesley Chapel, and I have been sworn in.

   Mike Ford

   2:22:25Thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   2:22:29The development of S19 for commercial or retail use in accordance with the master plan would provide more services for the residents of Seven Oaks and more jobs and tax revenue for Pasco County. it would also create traffic. that would be spread throughout the day. and not add to rush-hour congestion in our community. On the other hand, 320 new apartments would add to the existing traffic in a way that was never planned. The county

   2:22:59has not done a detailed study of what the new traffic patterns would be, taking the actual road infrastructure into account. Any trip to the north, for example to Ace Hardware or the car dealers on 54 or the movie theatres, requires three left turns across the traffic to get to Bruce P. Downs North. Or you can exit on Summergate, take a ride. and make a U-turn on Bruce B. Downs. Or you can do what Google Maps

   2:23:29suggests you do during rush hour. and drive straight through the Seven Oaks neighborhood. uh along Ancient Oak's Boulevard. That's what Google recommends. So

   2:23:45Hundreds of more cars driving through our neighborhood is just not desirable. Development of the land as it is currently zoned will not cause traffic problems, but rezoning will. A few years ago my wife wanted to rent some office space for a small business. There is remarkably little space available in the adjacent commercial developments. We need more commercial facilities for more jobs and more economic growth in Pasco County. We do not need to use that land for

   2:24:15apartments that create very few jobs.

   2:24:20If the land is rezoned, the surrounding community will lose the potential for more jobs and services in the neighborhood. and only get problems in return. Our neighborhood will become less desirable. and our property values will drop. Just a two percent drop in property values will collectively cost The 2007 Oak homeowners at least $20 million. We all lose so the developer can make money at our expense. It is a net loss to the community.

   2:24:51The developer is not able to fit the county required recreational facilities into their proposed development, so they're asking to be allowed to break the rules. The Seven Oaks Nature Trail is a wonderful amenity, only five minutes walk. from where the apartments will be. And you can check that on Google Maps. The nearest Seven Oaks neighbourhood park is also only five minutes away. So the amenities that we pay for and enjoy will become more crowded and of less

   2:25:21value. So I plead with you to deny the U request.

   StarkeyChair

   2:25:28Thank you. Thank you. Alright. So I've gone through my list and I've checked it twice. I just want to make sure that I've called everyone that is not part of the group that's going to present. Um so let me go through the names of the individuals that are gonna be presenting the various slides. Last names is um Tomsu, Lockwood, um I think it's Luo Could be wrong. Sierra, Irani, Mullen, and then at the end will be um attorney Waller uh Dalhard.

   2:25:59I just want to make sure is there anyone okay, good. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak that didn't sign up? Okay, go ahead and proceed. Come up to the front um and at the podium state your name and address and if you've been sworn.

   Dion Parks

   2:26:18Hi, my name is Dion Parks. I live at [address removed] and I did the little WebEx wear in sitting back there if that counts. It does count. Okay. Um I just wanna piggyback on the traffic issue because although the gentleman said that it would not create an issue We live there. I've been a resident for 18 years, and we have seen the progression of traffic throughout our community. And

   2:26:48with a business, they're mostly going to use that front entrance and that side entrance, which I think is the Summer Gate entrance, to enter and exit our community. If you put residents there, that is going to draw them in to the center of our neighborhoods. And you're also talking about adding another bus stop. to our community for elementary, middle and high school. And as we all well know, there's a busing

   2:27:19shortage for drivers, there's a teacher shortage for our schools. It's common knowledge. So and the amount of kids that exit the buses currently for those apartments is a lot. And I just don't wanna see our schools stretched more than they are already. And as far as bringing the apartments to the interior of the um A neighborhood. that would kind of alleviate some of the traffic actually that's coming through

   2:27:49the front borders of our community because it would be more on the back side because that's where we have the more open space. So I assume that that's where the land is zoned for for the apartments. So it would bring in a different flow throughout our streets. And I think that's important. And the second thing I would like to hit on is the design of these apartments. I have seen Beautiful apartments with similar designs, but they are not nestled into a parking

   2:28:19lot. They are facing the street. There is high density of pedestrian traffic to draw people in. They are on roads that are not situated on a 50 mile, 55 mile per hour main road. And yes, you are turning into a road that is a thirty mile per hour road. But you are coming off of a fifty five mile per hour road. Apartments like these are situated on roads

   2:28:49that have Low speed limits. They're not coming off of a six-lane highway. And like I said, there is a lot of pedestrian traffic that draws them into these retail establishments. you are not going to find that in this location. Somewhere that can offer them the opportunity for people in these apartments to walk to restaurants, to walk to a grocery store. to walk to a entertainment, like say the crates or around the grove,

   2:29:20or something like that, that's where these apartments thrive, not at the corner of This entrance off of a six-lane highway into a Sam's parking lot. It just isn't going to work. Thank you very much.

   StarkeyChair

   2:29:35All right. Anyone else before I call the uh individuals I named before? Okay. Then we will start with John Tomsu. And then as you're going through your presentation, I know the next person's gonna come up and the next person again if you when you come up name, address, and then state whether or not you've been been sworn.

   Moore

   2:29:54Yes, ma'am. Okay.

   2:29:57Second.

   StarkeyChair

   2:29:57All in favor?

   Moore

   2:29:58Second. Aye. You're good.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:30:01Excellent. Uh before I begin, may I ask a question?

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:05Um name and address for the record.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:30:07Yes, ma'am. Uh John Thompson, [address removed], Wesley Chapel, Florida, three three five four four. I have been sworn. Okay,

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:14what's the question?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:30:15So before my time starts, um I would ask uh actually I I'd beg. Um may may I please have one more minute um because Mr. Two actually brought up a whole bunch of concerns relating relating to the loom and made references um that are somewhat inaccurate and it's actually part of my uh presentation. So if I could have just one extra minute. And how much

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:36did what did we give you?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:30:37Um right now I have three minutes.

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:40Everyone it has three minutes in the group. No every group. Yeah, they're just going one

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:45up to the other. Okay, is anyone else gonna talk about the loom in your group?

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:48No.

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:49Okay. All right, we'll get another minute. So four minutes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:30:55Ready?

   StarkeyChair

   2:30:56Okay, nope. So no one else can talk about it. Are we good with the right-of-way you may proceed?

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   2:31:02Oh sorry.

   StarkeyChair

   2:31:03You've got it.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:31:04Four

   StarkeyChair

   2:31:04minutes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:31:09Okay. Sorry, so the first thing that I heard was um hey, this isn't a rezoning. Um unfortunately on resolution 2225 RZ, it's actually described as an MPD MPUD zoning amendment request. So maybe we use the wrong word. Maybe it's not supposed to be called rezoning, it's supposed to be a zoning amendment, but it is still a change. Uh what I'm gonna call out here is the denial, mediation, and revised proposal. Um, these are the sequence of events that we've been going over since January. Yeah. The denial was actually based off of subject excuse

   2:31:40me, wasn't based off of subjective whim, but it was actual law, code, statute, and plan. All of the references that are shown up here with the bullets are references to exactly what was used as the evidence against or for the denial of this property. Specific to employment generating uses, the reduction. Of employment generating entitlements, the fact that there wasn't a cost analysis executed, the unplanned and unmitigated uh demands on schools, libraries, and the park systems, and

   2:32:10then finally the traffic parking and pedestrian issues. While the revised proposal tried to address some of these, uh it was definitely negligible. It wasn't significant in nature. Um the mediation, uh, I think it was mentioned that well, it's over. I believe that this process is actually still part of the mediation, and that's why we never got anything from the special magistrate. So there was no finding, there was no summary, there was no end to it. So then it leads us to where we are right now. The revised proposal only added 25,000 more square feet, or excuse me, 5,000

   2:32:41more square feet for a total of 25,000 square feet. Additionally, the uh pedestrian features and traffic calming mechanisms are specific to only blanking.

   StarkeyChair

   2:32:50I'm

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:32:50so

   StarkeyChair

   2:32:51glad you're doing great. I'm

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:32:52going to

   StarkeyChair

   2:32:52take notes while you're speaking.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:32:54Okay.

   2:32:56And traffic calming mechanisms are they're only in one area. They don't actually address all of the areas. Um what I'd like to call out and we'll we'll re brought up later on is uh the Walmart deed restrictions. Um earlier in the in the previous meetings, um it has been proven that no one wants to put it there. Uh that's what Commissioner Starkey mentioned on January 11th. Um the fact is for 14 years it remained undeveloped, for five years it wasn't purchasable. Uh simply because if you look at the Walmart deed restrictions, it restricts any uh office or retail from doing business that

   2:33:26conflicts with Sam's Club. So if you have businesses that can't sell tires or can't sell uh cafe items or can't sell food or can't sell you know t-shirts and that kind of stuff, it really aligns with uh Commissioner Starkey's uh comment that the kind of commercial that goes into these kinds Of buildings is really special. It would have to be really special because Sam's Club covers pretty much all of this stuff. Lastly, I want to refer to Tom Lavish. You don't have to read between the lines here. He was very clear. Developers

   2:33:57take risks. It's part of this balancing act of ensuring in vertical mixed use that you can effectively cross-subsidize uses that may be slightly weaker than use on a slight that may be stronger. Meaning, whenever the developer gets his way, builds his apartments. He doesn't care if the entitlements underneath it stay vacant. So if the businesses don't sell anything, that's fine. If they can't put anything in the bottom, that's fine. Because the money that he's put in towards the uh Uh apartments

   2:34:27will offset any of that type of necess uh necessity. Um the loom confusion. Oh crap.

   2:34:35Sorry about that. The uh loom confusion. Um

   2:34:41It was made that it was a precedent that uh we've done this time and time again before. Um, the past 15, it was mentioned 15 in the last meeting, conversions, uh, not one had been disputed or denied. Whenever you look at the history of these, and they are on the MPUD uh document, they are inside all the agenda packets. Um, it was conversion from a hotel to a hospital or uh a golf course to a walking trail. There is never And please talk to your planning department. There has never been a case where an MPUD entitlement was changed from commercial

   2:35:11or you know retail or office into multifamily. And more specifically, the numbers that were cited, I'm running out of time. 1726 is the absolute number, but that number becomes 2046. So the map that he's talking about is inaccurate. The fifty the 555 that are dedicated towards the South, yes, those are consumed. But if you look at the MPUD, it's defined by South Region, Central Region, and Northern Region. What he's cons what he's suggesting happen is give more entitlements than what the MPUD allowed.

   2:35:42Whenever we talk about keep the history, do the things that we've done in the past. This isn't it. If you have five hundred and fifty five entitlements, that's what you stick with in the South. In the North, you can't take away from their entitlements. You can't say, Well, there's 1726 and I'm gonna start pulling it away, right? So you gotta look at the math. And I'm sorry that I'm not the expert here. I really wish that you'd you know be able to pull more from the planning staff where they can tell you what the truth is about these numbers because what's been conveyed is not accurate and um Should be looked into. So

   2:36:12I'm sorry I wasn't able to go through the rest.

   MarianoVice Chair

   2:36:16You you had one more minute, right?

   StarkeyChair

   2:36:19Yeah, you you was that three minutes. Who did the timer? Was that three minutes or four minutes?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:36:25That was four

   StarkeyChair

   2:36:25minutes. That was your four.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:36:27Yes.

   StarkeyChair

   2:36:27But you got a lot in.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:36:28There's so much more. And unfortunately

   StarkeyChair

   2:36:30Well, I I think there's a whole whole bunch of people coming in. Thank you. Great job. What do you do professionally? Thank you. What does he do professionally? Uh I'm sorry? I just wondered what you do professionally.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:36:43Uh professionally I'm an uh IT contractor for uh government projects. Okay. So not in public speaking.

   StarkeyChair

   2:36:49Great, thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:36:52Okay. Um this is next. Is it? I can't br I I the writing um Lockwood? I'm sorry. Oh it's Hannah. Oh now I can see.

   Moore

   2:37:07We weren't

   StarkeyChair

   2:37:07even close. No, look, it looks like an M.

   Moore

   2:37:10Let me see that.

   2:37:11Yeah. Right here.

   2:37:14She's right.

   Hannah Lockwood

   2:37:15It looks like an M, I'll give

   Moore

   2:37:16it

   2:37:16to you. Sorry.

   2:37:18So

   Hannah Lockwood

   2:37:19my name is Hannah Lockwood. My address is [address removed], in the Western Chapel. Um I have been sworn. Thank you. Okay. And if I could just have one moment, because I don't know what's up to you. Sure.

   2:37:44Okay, change of plants here. I'm going to jump forward. A little bit.

   StarkeyChair

   2:37:50Yeah. What I have is um on my paper is slide fifteen you start on? Be

   Hannah Lockwood

   2:37:57sure

   StarkeyChair

   2:37:57to lift that mic up

   Hannah Lockwood

   2:37:58so that

   StarkeyChair

   2:37:58you're

   Hannah Lockwood

   2:37:59speaking to it.

   2:38:04I'm getting there. Alright. So we're going to move on to the density.

   2:38:11Um

   2:38:15It's giving me I'm a little wing in here, so um the maximum possible growth density is twenty-four dwelling units per acre. Um we have four apartment nearby apartments. The enclave has 312 units on 43.4 acres, that's 7.2 units per acre. Monterra Park, as you can see, has 264 units on 26.3 acres. That equals to about 10 units per acre. Kilomet grand, three eighteen units on twenty acres, which

   2:38:46equals to about fifteen point nine unit units per acre. Windsor Club has two hundred two hundred and forty units. on fourteen point seven acres, which equ equates to sixteen point three units. Um on the S nineteen. parcel. They're proposing three hundred and twenty units. On ten point six acres. That equates to thirty point two units per acre. Out of a twenty point five percent over density lemon.

   2:39:18As you've heard already, this project does not fit on this parcel.

   2:39:24On ten point six six acres of um land, they're trying to cram in three hundred and twenty apartments plus the commercial space underneath.

   2:39:35There's traffic concerns. Um The buildable land is only 4.45 acres.

   2:39:47Pasco averages 2.54 people per Haskell. At three hundred and twenty apartments, that's eight hundred and thirteen people.

   2:40:03Members of the Board, piecemeal rezoning of small parcels of land to a greater density leads to a disharmony with the surrounding area. I would ask you to please deny this this um proposal. It does not fit in this area. We're not opposed to apartments, but in the places that are zoned for it, not on this parcel. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:40:23Uh I think you have a minute left though. I'm not sure that's talking right. But you still have a minute.

   Hannah Lockwood

   2:40:28Oh well. We'll keep moving. On the parking issue. Um all y all uses shall meet the parking requirements of the L D C At least two parking spaces per resid residential unit are required. The fifteen percent reduction is unwarranted in this proposal. Only point four percent of Pasco residents commute by vast transit.

   2:40:55The number one selling vehicle is a Ford F-150, which is 20.4 feet. The parking space is proposed as a standard is 9 by 20 feet, which is 180 square feet total, and compact is 8 by 18 feet, which is 144 square feet.

   2:41:16The question is, where does overflow parking go? And where does the trash and trash truck go? Nice. All right. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:41:26Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:41:26Okay. Alan Lou.

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   2:41:36Can yeah, please can you bring out the uh traffic with PowerPoint? Sorry, I I changed uh I made some last minute changes, so I'm gonna have to flip to that.

   StarkeyChair

   2:41:43So while we're waiting, do you want to say your name and

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   2:41:45address and

   StarkeyChair

   2:41:45whether

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   2:41:46it's

   2:41:46a little bit more?

   2:41:46Alan Lou, my address is [address removed] in uh uh Seven Oaks. Uh I've been spar swear in. So Okay, can you flip to the next? Okay, let's get started. Good afternoon commissioners. Uh so all the all the concerns that the local residents has brought up in the original uh meeting was not either not addressed or not addressed properly during the new proposal. So with the new proposal Sorry. Uh if you can see it calls out a pedestrian Crosswalk

   2:42:17right there. Uh because the main parking garage is designed right across the lot from where all the con uh older apartment complex is majority of the residents gonna have to walk across this road, go to the uh the parking garage. So with the flashing light uh from with the flashing light for the pedestrian safety, now there's one of the unintended consequences is the traffic is gonna be backflow into it's gonna cause traffic delay it's gonna backflow right into the Asian

   2:42:47O the Asian O Drive and then spell over back onto State Road 56, therefore cost of a major traffic jam. Now, also there's a second parking spot in the new proposal. Uh uh is right along the second main entry, uh main entry and exit road. Now from there, there is no oh apologize, technology, there is no Uh proposed there's no pedestrian safety proposed in that second parking space right on the top. So do we not care about those residents that's walking

   2:43:17across the second main road? Do we care about them less? Now once the traffic flow right past the apartment, let's say they uh as indicated in the red arrow, you see it flows right through into the Sams Club parking lot, goes through The SAMS main entrance as indicated in the red arrow. Again, I think I heard Ms. Joe talking about uh there was no proposal at the moment because SAMS would not approve it until County approved it, but there is no additional safety concern, pedestrian safety

   2:43:47concern built into this new uh built into this new proposal. So we don't care about the SAMS pedestrian consumers either, I guess, at this point. Um so Again, last time I brought up once you pass Sam's Club, there's a daycare right there. If you're not local residents, you don't know where that daycare is. So let me show you a picture. This is Sam's club on the left. Turn the corner hundred fifty yard is the daycare. So my kids goes there. There's um There's no additional safety precaution safety

   2:44:18measure brought up in the new proposal. So people cross this lot all the time trying to drop their kids during peak time. How are they protected? How is our kids protected? So, Mr. Oakley, I want to quote you in the original denial. You said from the get-go uh that I have not been in support of this project. I have always felt that the size of the project is too large for the site. To me, when you give up space for parking, give up space for park, then you're doing it because you just don't have land for the project. So the land is too big. I mean the the project is too big for the

   2:44:48land. And um um they're still asking for parking variation, still asking for uh uh park uh the park variations, with just adding one specific uh pedatrian safety right there and five thousand more square foot commercial space. How is that make this a better fit of the pro of the site? Thank you very much. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:45:10All right. Next up is Kathryn Sierra.

   StarkeyChair

   2:45:18Lot of capital.

   Kathy Sierra

   2:45:21Love yeah. Hi. I'm Kathy Sierra, [address removed] four and I have been signed. Sworn in. How do I get back to the original presentation? She can change the

   StarkeyChair

   2:45:38right here. They'll do it right here.

   Kathy Sierra

   2:45:41They'll do it.

   StarkeyChair

   2:45:42Yeah.

   Kathy Sierra

   2:45:42What's page do you want?

   StarkeyChair

   2:45:44Um

   Kathy Sierra

   2:45:44twenty

   StarkeyChair

   2:45:44two?

   Kathy Sierra

   2:45:46Twenty-two please. Thank you. Yes, thank you so much. So I just want to continue talking to you guys about pedestrian safety. and how it's been brought up that, you know, that this area is very walkable and bikeable. Um I've spoken many times here about how wrong this project is suited for the entrance of Seven Oaks. I want to bring to your attention today about how this area is not walkable and bikeable, as many people would like for you to

   2:46:16believe. I feel so strongly about this for two reasons. Uh the first reason is that I grew up in New York City. And I can consider myself an expert in what's walkable and what's bikeable. And I can tell you that seven oaks is definitely do not fit the definition of walkable and bikeable, not even close. Um, let me give you an a vision of how the entrance of Seven Oaks is laid out if you want to attempt to walk to a few stores instead of driving. So

   2:46:47I want to go to the stores at Wiregrass to do some shopping. I would need to cross ten lanes of traffic on Bruce B. Downs. After shopping is done I need a few things at public's yeah, it's just right across the street. It's so walkable. Yeah, that's just another ten lanes of traffic that I'd need to cut across. Then after I'm done at Publix I need to pick up a prescription at CVS and again another ten lanes of traffic. Then it's time to head home. Another

   2:47:17eight lanes of traffic to cross over State Road fifty six. That's a total of thirty eight lanes of traffic, just to go across to a few stores. The second reason is that I'm experienced firsthand about how dangerous these intersections are. I was hit by a car. On my bike. while trying to cross the street just in front of Publix. I had the right of way But the driver on the car was not paying any attention to pedestrians because

   2:47:47there are rarely any pedestrians walking around in that area. Thankfully My bike was destroyed and I did not suffer any major injuries. Um But the reason that there are two hospitals around there, the only good that that will do is to bring all the people to the hospitals from being hit. Um Also, let's talk about mass transit. Growing up in New York City, I understand how to utilize mass transit. Seven Oaks being a hub of mass transit

   2:48:17is absolutely laughable. Only 0.4% of Pasco County residents take mass transit. The existing bus stop in front of S-19 does not even have a published schedule or stop on that route's documentation. And just one last thing before I'd like to depart. Just before Commissioner Pi Fitzpatrick cast her yes vote for parcel S19 on January 11, 2022. This is what she said, perverbatum.

   2:48:49As long as there is a playground to accommodate the kids, I'm fine with it. Comits of Fitzpatrick, there's never been a playground and there's still not a playground. These children will be playing in Sam's Club parking lot. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:49:04Alright, next we have we have Shiraz irani.

   Shiraz Irani

   2:49:11Good afternoon Commissioners. My name is Shiraz Irani. I'm a Seven Oaks resident at [address removed]. And I have been sworn in. Um if I can just get to the slide that I wish to speak to.

   2:49:36Yeah, yes. Wanting to get to twenty four, so bear with me.

   2:49:44Oh, got back one.

   StarkeyChair

   2:49:49I have I have slide twenty four on the on the sticky note.

   Shiraz Irani

   2:49:53Oh. Okay. Okay. There are over half a million residents in Pasco, but only nineteen percent of them live and work in the same place. The result is more demand for county services, lower family incomes, lower sales tax revenue. Less commercial tax generating land Apartment impact fee addiction. The

   2:50:24S ninete proposal targets 133,000 plus households and generates developer profits yielding low-paying jobs and wastes. ten point six acres of commercial land.

   2:50:49There is a Pasco commercial land demand in that business applications are up. twenty two point five percent Commercial is up forty percent year over year. Commercial land generates more revenue. per acre, then do apartments. The community of Seven Oaks is the largest voting constituents in Pasco County. Commissioner Starkey,

   2:51:19you yourself, with respect. emphasized not wanting to give up commercial and industrial property, which this parcel of land is zoned for. Commissioners, respectfully we ask you to listen to the residents of Seven Oaks, your constituents, take into concern our concerns about traffic coming in from 56. We're already f struggling getting into our own community. We

   2:51:49are struggling getting out of our own community. And with uh this is just going to make it a lot worse. We respectfully thank you for your time and we ask that you vote no.

   StarkeyChair

   2:52:03Patrick Mullen. Next.

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   2:52:14Here we are.

   2:52:17Who makes zoning decisions in this county? Oh Mr.

   StarkeyChair

   2:52:20Mullen. Your name,

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   2:52:21address, and Patrick Mullen. Yes. [address removed]. And I haven't sworn in.

   StarkeyChair

   2:52:27Thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   2:52:28So the question is, who makes zoning decisions in this county? Commissioner Walmart? And that that is the great underlying issue here. We're all familiar with zoning considerations that we all have to uphold and take into account so that we have upstanding community that's growing and getting better. But this particular proposal is an excellent example of spot zoning where you have a

   2:52:58s essentially creating a small island Right there. Different than that of the surrounding properties solely for the benefit of a particular property owner. That makes this a good reason for denial of the proposal. Also, contract zoning cr uh considerations. Sorry, I have to be near the mic. Contract zoning considerations. This is an agreement between a governmental body and a private landowner to rezone property for consideration. This

   2:53:28is the way we used to do business in Chicago. Not anymore. This practice has long been disapproved in Florida and is grounds for denial of this proposal. The D. Ah yes, the D from Walmart that's making the zoning question. The it allows any quote, any bank or financial institution And but it specifies that they retain the rights to everything below ground. that they could go

   2:53:58in and mine at any time. It also speaks that there should be not less than 300 multifamily units next door, essentially building. Another thousand customers for Sam's Club.

   2:54:15But it prohibits almost anything in the world of commercial or retail. You can't be a discount store, you can't build a gas station there, you can't build a theater, bowling alley, spa, fitness center, lockers, or any combination of the foregoing. It also prohibits adult bookstores, video business activities, gaming activities, billiard parlors, checking cash, or selling marijuana. The proposal does, however, promise protection. Promises protection to the county commissioners and staff.

   2:54:46Whereby it will hold them harmless if you agree to their proposal. and anyone challenges it. They will promise to provide you with protection. From any legal costs involved in protecting the decision to approve. That provides a special benefit to the developer and, damn the torpedoes, they say that even if the challenge

   2:55:16has not resolved, they will operate under their own risk and proceed with their plan for S-19.

   2:55:27Is it possible? Well Let's go to this slide. Did stock development not realize it was commercial? Did an ever ever wonder why it was never sold before? Uh uh did they know about the restrictions? Did S D L L C get bad advice? Bottom line, when you buy a new car. See how many of us read the fine print? Someone did not read the fine print on the deed restrictions to this property,

   2:55:58which prohibits Competition to Sam's Club and almost requires additional 1,000 customers. So this is a reason to deny. There are plenty of alternatives. Sell it to a commercial developer, donate it, nullify, go to circuit court and nullify the deed restrictions so you can build something worthwhile and build the excellent apartment. By the way, we really want your apartments to give you creative stuff.

   2:56:29Not cookie cutter apartments like this scene being built every year. Thank you, Mr. Lightner Stuff. Thank you very much. Build a seven oak center. Here. Is that five? And no,

   StarkeyChair

   2:56:41he he gets to work.

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   2:56:42We give him another minute. We did yes.

   2:56:49We still come out ahead using the existing use for the property, using the SDLM benefits, the simple development lawyer math benefits analysis. It would still cost the county uh a million dollars more per. Year using their proposal than to go with the existing zoning. So, so many inconsistencies, it violates community planning law, contract planning law. S19 is the wrong place for the development. You know, it obey obeys

   2:57:20these laws, but it does not obey the Planning Act. The conclusion is the denial should remain undisturbed. Just as you know Commissioner Oakley said from the get-go, I've been in support of the project. The land is not getting any bigger. It's still too s the project is still too big for this piece of line or a piece of property. And indeed, Commissioner Starkey, we don't want to give up commercial or industrial industrial property for apartments.

   2:57:50Development is a privilege. Not a right. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:57:55You're very well. All right. Uh we have now we have the attorney. Chelsea

   Chelsea Waller Dothri

   2:58:01Waller Park.

   2:58:07Eight months. And I will try to be as brief as possible. Chelsea Waller Dothard with Waller Law. I represent the Seven Oak C D. Address is three eight zero three eight Meridian Avenue, Dade City, Florida, three three five two five, and I have been sworn. Um I've also requested eight minutes, which was approved. Eight minutes, yep, and then we'll have

   StarkeyChair

   2:58:29rebuttal.

   Chelsea Waller Dothri

   2:58:30All right, we are here on the applicant's third bite at the apple. Um, and today it is the task of the commissioners to determine whether the applicant's modification to this project now warrant approval. So let's go through the main four modifications that were set forth in the county's memo for today. The first that we talked about today is the Good Faith Cooperation with Sands Club. The applicant is only required to send two letters within 30 days notice and to request

   2:59:01a response. Sands Club is under no obligation to agree to this. They have requested more documentation, but they don't have any reason to do this. If they want to say no, then they c have the right to deny it. Um so I think it's I think it's important that we're not going to be able to do This shouldn't be a factor in your decision to approve this this project. Additionally, the safety of pedestrians within the Sams Club

   2:59:31parking lot wasn't a voiced concern at the January hearing. So again, this should not even be considered in your decision today to approve it. Um the second is the pedestrian safety and traffic. And the concern was in the center aisle between the two buildings. So the applicant has implemented a pedestrian safety and traffic calming feature on the central drive aisle. Commissioner Oakley was the one who did voice a concern as

   3:00:01to the safety of that center aisle. And but that was just one reason for part of your denial, Commissioner.

   3:00:10quote which was stated previously but I think it's important to reiterate um Commissioner Oakley stated from the get-go I have not been in support of this project. I've always felt that the project was too large for the site. To me when you give up spaces for parking and you give up spaces for a park, then you're doing that because you don't have enough land to put this project on. That's my opinion. And he went on to further state I just don't understand Understand the change in this project. It was going to be better as a commercial project than a residential project from the get-go.

   3:00:41So that leads us into the third modification. Um The applicant states that they have reduced their parking variances. Note that they have not eliminated their request for parking variances. Um And one of the changes is now they are not requiring a uh variance for surface parking stalls. They will comply with the LDC minimum dimensions for that. But they are still requesting a variance to 1.9 parking spaces per multifamily unit. And they are

   3:01:11not having to be they are not required to provide any additional parking for the retail office component to this project. And I think that's important. So again, variances for parking still exist if this project is approved. Not to mention uh the variances from the park requirement. Um The applicant should be required to put in 3.2 acres of park. for the size of this project.

   3:01:42However, they're still requesting a variance to only one acre. for 320 units on that project. They're also requesting a variance from the multipro multiple park requirement that would allow Um to the use of smaller parks to um equal the total uh park and those minimum parks have to be half acre and they're not able to comply with that either. Um setbacks this modification

   3:02:13now doesn't require any interior minimum building setback requirements and the previous was five feet. So again There are still several variances. Um that still need to occur in order for this project to be able to quote unquote fit on this parcel. So again, it doesn't fit and it should be denied. Um and then the last major modification is the increased retail an office by five thousand square

   3:02:43feet. Um then this was the Essentially the main topic of the January hearing. The property currently has entitlements of 86,000 square feet of commercial use. And a lot of the discussion focused on the revenue model that was used by the county that had sixty thousand square feet of commercial use instead of the appropriate number of eighty-six thousand square feet. And Commissioner Mariano uh pointed this out as well. Um And I introduced the correct

   3:03:13REME model as an exhibit at the January hearing. And so I would um ask to reconsider that exhibit. Um and as you may recall, that Remy model showed that 86,000 square feet of commercial use generated more jobs than the applicant's proposal. And Commissioner Mariano commented then that we could bring jobs right here. right in this community community that are first class. Do

   3:03:43we want to give that up for 320 apartments and 25,000 square feet of commercial? And the policies were policy E D one point Four point four. Which outlines Pasco County shall recognize the high priority of retaining employment generating land uses in appropriate and compatible locations within the county. And also policy ED 1.6.2, counties shall ensure that adequate land and transportation capacity is available for present and future

   3:04:13high-paying employment generated land uses, such as office industrial, employment center uses. So the question is: Does the addition of 5,000 square feet of commercial now put this project in compliance with those rules? The answer is no. We need jobs. We need to maintain the 86,000 square feet of commercial entitlements that currently exist on this property. Um Other items I'll briefly touch on that were discussed at the January hearing is compatibility.

   3:04:45Um Pasco County shall manage growth concurrent with the infrastructure necessary to protect, maintain, and enhance the Wesley Chapel community's unique character. character. And the beautiful presentation touched on the density, and I had a spreadsheet at the last hearing that showed the density of the apartments within Seven Oaks and then the density outside of Seven Oaks. And this particular project is double the density of any apartment within Seven Oaks. And

   3:05:15it's almost uh 2.3 times the density of any apartment complex within the area. This is not in line with character of Wesley Chapel. This is in line with the character of South Tampa or Orlando where you see these type of projects. This is not compatible with Wesley Chapel. It's not the board's job to decide whether parcel S19 should have an increased density. It's the board's job to decide if this project is compatible and it is not. Approving 32

   3:05:45units per acre will set a dangerous precedent, an irreversible precedent in our county. If this project is approved, then every developer is going to come into our county demanding the same density, and there goes the unique character of Pasco County. We have all these people who've moved here to Pasco County. I moved back from South Tampa, and we will eventually be just like that, where residents are fleeing from and Pasco County residents do not want this type of growth. Let's be sparn about our growth and this is not it. So for

   3:06:15those reasons and all the other others that have been discussed today and at the January hearing, I would request that it be denied.

   StarkeyChair

   3:06:23Thanks.

   Kathy Sierra

   3:06:23Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   3:06:25Okay, um now we have rebuttal and um I have questions but

   3:06:32I'll

   Oakley

   3:06:32have a question when he finishes

   StarkeyChair

   3:06:34okay do we want him to rebut first or do we want him to ask questions? Yeah I'd like to do

   Joel

   3:06:39a rebuttal

   StarkeyChair

   3:06:39first after I'm

   Joel

   3:06:41sorry I have

   StarkeyChair

   3:06:41two pages of questions.

   Joel

   3:06:42Okay, Joel two for the applicant, thank you. Uh let me briefly address some of the technical points that Ms. Waller just made. of all the reason there is a substantial change in the site plan and why it makes more sense now and is more safe is because of the mandatory structured parking. The minute you go vertical with structured parking, you therefore reduce the footprint you need for surface parking. You can make these drive aisles wider, which is what we're doing, and you solve the parking issue

   3:07:13with vertical structured parking. People don't do that because it is very, very expensive. You have begged people to do that, and in fact, you will not get bona fide urban mixed use. Use projects without vertical parking. That solves the site plan issues and that's why this is dramatically different. It is not fair it is not fair to say We're still asking for a bunch of deviations. We're not. We eliminated every deviation we're asking for except for two items that technically are called

   3:07:43deviations, but your staff will tell you that the park requirement and the number of parking spaces is exactly the same thing that you've approved in the last two years for probably three or four dozen projects. Every one I've had. That has now become the norm. Your new norm is 1.9 spaces per apartment. Ask Mr. Pitos that. You approve it every meeting. Same thing for park. We are doing what your parks department told us

   3:08:13we're required to do. We're meeting their new standard requirement. My guess is that in your next LDC update, you'll now see these requirements. requirements not be deviations, they will be your new code requirement. And ask Mr. Pito said if you have any question. Okay? So that's not accurate. All of the parking spaces are now full-size parking spaces. And yes, our amenities will include a children's play area, as Mr. Gelder has assured Commissioner Fitzpatrick. It

   3:08:43will be done. In conclusion. This is the poster child. for vertical mixed use infill project. It is not supposed to look like a suburban part of Seven Oaks or Wiregrass Ranch. It is supposed to look like a vertical mixed use infield project. It's supposed to look like West Chase Park. It's supposed to look like Hyde Park or say it is the whole point of what you're trying to get people to do

   3:09:13on US 9 and then the 19 and the 56-54 corner is to create this walkable look. If you don't have density, it's not walkable. The lady from New York knows density because the reason New York's walkable is because it's dense. The buildings are tall. We are it is not a density issue. The number of units per acre is irrelevant. The MPUD was approved based on a thousand or more acres. There are the density issue is that there are 1,726

   3:09:45approved. Less than half of them built Every unit we're building, there was a traffic study approved in that DRI for 1,726 multifamily units. You're only gonna have half that number. So, any density argument, any traffic argument is entirely spurious. This is consistent with your board policy. Do you remember 2020 when you adopted a board policy memorandum encouraging

   3:10:15vertical mixed-use development in the 54-56 quarter? Your own is still in effect, your 2020 policy memorandum. Your ordinance number 22.

   3:10:27When you eliminated conditional use apartments in C2 zonings, you made an exception. And guess what your section was? For vertical mixed use. So if you do more vertical mixed use, you could even do it as a conditional use in C2. You can do it in the 54, 56 quarters. So if you're going to be consistent with your written board policy over the last two years, if you're going to be consistent with what you've told us to bring you in the form of development, this is

   3:10:57your proposal. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   3:11:00No chair. Okay. Wow you Joe, you were under your five minutes. I got walking. Uh and so how much time is how much time do they have left? No. Hang on. Did he use his five minutes? No. Did anyone else on your team want to use any of your time? Because No, he did not use his five minutes. I it's Mike, I'm chair. If he has more f if he hasn't used his five minutes, I'm

   3:11:31gonna let

   Joel

   3:11:32I would rather spend the time addressing any questions that anyone might have. I think you understand the project and I'm not gonna waste your time. Okay.

   StarkeyChair

   3:11:42All right, so now we'll go to Commissioner Moore.

   Moore

   3:11:45Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   3:11:46And then Commissioner Oakley gets.

   Moore

   3:11:48So uh Terry c Terry, if you don't mind, I'm gonna borrow you. Thank you.

   3:12:02All right, Mr. Pitez. Hey question for you. So um a couple questions, just comments, maybe you can chime in, I'd appreciate it. Um last time the uh motion tonight which did pass, um let me just go over that one portion of that of that motion was reserved request is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan policies FLU 1.8 point ten. in ED 1.6.2, which is the preservation of capacity for employment generating

   3:12:32uses in ED 1.4.4 limitation on the conversion of important employment locations because it is undisputed the request will reduce the employment generating entitlement on the site. And before it was 60,000

   3:12:48And it went down to uh uh uh uh uh tw twenty thousand, right? Yeah, it went down to twenty. Now we're looking at fifty-five thousand. to twenty five thousand, correct? Exactly. I think I'm right, right? So before it was sixty, the previous it's being reduced to twenty, but now they've added five thousand more square foot of retail commercial, so it brings that up to twenty-five and takes the site estimate before to fifty five thousand.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   3:13:25Okay, something just came in about

   Moore

   3:13:26a

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   3:13:26mic.

   Moore

   3:13:27Yeah, okay, there

   3:13:27you go.

   3:13:28Sixty thousand.

   StarkeyChair

   3:13:29Mike, is your mic turn on?

   Moore

   3:13:31I don't know why it keeps going off. Yeah, I don't know why it keeps going off. Because you know, I never touch this thing.

   Theodore Rhodes

   3:13:37Yeah.

   Moore

   3:13:39Okay, so I'm correct, right? Well well It was sixty thousand before.

   Oakley

   3:13:43Yeah, so the the previous Remy model analysis um was uh presuming a sixty thousand square foot single use commercial retail office. Right.

   3:13:56Okay.

   3:13:56That was the that was the model analysis.

   Moore

   3:13:58Right. So they were gonna give twenty thousand, but now they're giving twenty-five thousand.

   Oakley

   3:14:04Uh now they're doing twenty five thousand

   Moore

   3:14:06stuff. Okay. So right. Okay. So we

   Oakley

   3:14:08had thirty five.

   Moore

   3:14:10So So we're still in about the same situation as we were before. We're only we're it's it's it's a change out of of five thousand additional square foot of of office, but we're so we're still We're still um down to

   3:14:26Well, thirty-five thousand now, correct?

   Oakley

   3:14:30Right. Well I'm I'm not sure what kind of the

   Moore

   3:14:32I'm just using your numbers that you gave that

   Oakley

   3:14:34you used. So th they're not uh the the analysis that was done, if I remember correctly, it's been ten months. Um but the analysis was a comparison of the sixty thousand single user single use against what was being proposed in terms of the vertically integrated mixed use development. So it was the sixty

   3:15:09So it's six it was

   Moore

   3:15:10sixty

   Oakley

   3:15:10thousand, right? Okay, versus the vertical integrated

   Moore

   3:15:15minus twenty is forty.

   3:15:18And right. Okay, that was forty. Now we're just adding five more thousand, so it's down to thirty five, right? Well I know the answer. I'm just asking if you know the answer.

   Padong Anal Bata

   3:15:27Do you

   Oakley

   3:15:27mind the same line?

   3:15:32The thing that I mentioned in my presentation was that we didn't do a third REM model analysis. Okay. Um because when by adding the additional five thousand square feet, uh it was an improvement in in addition to what was originally approved. And if we were okay with With the original 20,000 square feet because it rendered the negligible revenue differences, adding five thousand square feet uh would mean that we're still good with it. Okay. So

   Barbara Wilhite

   3:16:00let's

   Oakley

   3:16:01answer my question?

   Moore

   3:16:01Well, this is this is the rest of it. If you don't mind, then if you don't mind, then it's on that it's on the yeah, exactly. So so you just mentioned this. Did you or the applicant um conduct any service consumption costs in that? Yeah.

   Oakley

   3:16:15Uh on the twenty five thousand square feet? Not a not not More than what we did for January's meeting. So what whatever analysis was done for January? Is what's on the record. There was not another analysis done for this meeting.

   Moore

   3:16:31My motion last time, if I'm not correct, there wasn't one done at all on the t on the other on the twenty.

   3:16:39Because that was a disputed.

   Oakley

   3:16:41So can you repeat the resolution?

   Moore

   3:16:42So my motion was the rezoning request is inconsistent with comprehensive plan policy one point eight point seven economic development because staff and the applicant have failed to conduct any service consumption consumption or cost analysis. Therefore, staff and the applicant have failed to demonstrate that the project will contribute more to the county revenue than will consume its services.

   StarkeyChair

   3:16:58Is that a requirement?

   Moore

   3:17:02Yeah. But that's a requirement in the in the comprehensive plan. Correct.

   3:17:07Right.

   3:17:08I'm sorry. Is that correct?

   Oakley

   3:17:11Policy flu one eight seven is in the comments of plan, of course. Yeah. Okay. So

   Moore

   3:17:16I have more but go ahead because you're all the same.

   StarkeyChair

   3:17:18So um so the county so we made that directive to say if you're gonna put

   Joel

   3:17:23That's not what I'm saying.

   StarkeyChair

   3:17:25What?

   3:17:31Okay.

   Joel

   3:17:31And that's not

   StarkeyChair

   3:17:31what we

   Joel

   3:17:32don't say.

   StarkeyChair

   3:17:32Pasco County shall encourage development which will contribute more to the county in revenue then it will consume in services provided that sex development can be accomplished within the spirit of this comprehensive plan. That one?

   Oakley

   3:17:45So is it right. So what we talked about back in January, if I rem if I recall correctly, it was that We're not looking for uh it's not a race to identify which is a uh a better user to the site based on the revenue generation, but only that the land use is generating net revenue to the county. So while you could have a use that generates a lot of revenue and

   3:18:16another use that doesn't generate as much revenue but still generating revenue, it was still meeting pol that Lesser revenue generator would still meet policy flu one eight seven.

   StarkeyChair

   3:18:28Okay, so my question was gonna be Um When we made this policy directive that if you're gonna put residential or mixed use. And a C two. We you had to go vertical. And I'm being consistent when I meet with people, I turn people down. uh who want to come in with parks and not do that and I said nope. In my district, I mean we're following this. Do we have a requirement of how much they

   3:18:58have to put underneath? Or did we just say We want to be sure they have something underneath. When we did our policy directive.

   Oakley

   3:19:07Um I think w in terms of the C two amendment that occurred, uh there was no um prescribed square footage amount uh required for let's say the the ground floor of a vertically integrated mixed use building that would be built under C two. If the C two, however, is in a calm commercial future lens. use district, then the first floor entirely would have to be non-residential use. Not

   3:19:38necessarily the case in an ROR, for example, future land use. So um when we're when we're speaking specifically about the Land Development Code amendment that that occurred, there's there's no prescription to say that you must have, you know, thirty thousand square feet or whatever of uh commercial entitlement on your first floor. Only to demonstrate that you have vertically integrated with commercial or n other non residential that's allowed by the C two.

   StarkeyChair

   3:20:06Right. And Terry and I just had a meeting. And that's the apart the person I don't remember the name of it. That was continued. Where they came in with multifamily and a C two, no Um part of really they were putting other things besides retail commercial Downstairs when we said nope. Um that is not what this board has directed. Not only that, they blocked a a road, but that was another thing, but I mean We

   3:20:37we cannot, in my opinion, tell some developers one thing And tell another group, another, or we're gonna get in big trouble.

   Moore

   3:20:46Could I continue on my question? You go on.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   3:20:49Commissioner Moore if if I may.

   Moore

   3:20:51Yeah, please go ahead

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   3:20:52let me so the section you put in the land development code says C two multiple family dwelling units where a project wherein the proposed project complies with one or more of the following. Two. Vertically integrated mixed use, paren, ground floor commercial, office, or other residential use. So there's no definition other than it's the ground floor and it's gotta be commercial office or other other

   3:21:22non residential

   StarkeyChair

   3:21:23Yeah that's why we told our group they had to go back to the drawing report.

   Moore

   3:21:28So would the existing um If it was just retail or office. Would it have any additional command demands on schools, libraries or parks? If it w stat as it is today.

   Oakley

   3:21:43If it was commercial and office there would not be a demand on parts, schools and for the third one you mentioned.

   StarkeyChair

   3:21:52Can I ask a question on that, Mike?

   Moore

   3:21:55Are we going first to name basis on the diocese? So I stop saying so I stop saying Chair and say Catherine and you say Mike. I mean I'm fine with that, but I'll I'll return the favor.

   StarkeyChair

   3:22:05Um so because I I have this question for the attorney, but we can have the planner a uh answer it too. Um because I wrote this down here. Um So this is part of the Seven Oak C D District. Um w and and when the numbers or D R I I'm sorry. When the numbers were contemplated in the total DRI It included s 1,726 multifamily units. When, and

   3:22:36this for some of the folks that are sitting here, Um when that DRI goes through for approval are those units counted by the school district and frankly the parts department in their um concurrency and And um

   3:22:56V I don't know what the right word is. Um capacity.

   Oakley

   3:23:01Well typically when you um W when you're reviewing an MPUD because we don't do D R I's anymore. But when you when you're reviewing an MPUD, the the total number of units that are being proposed are being looked at by the school district, by the different agencies and and departments, and they're making the necessary accommodations. Um sometimes in a school site is required and that's set aside based on the uh potential population that the area will have.

   3:23:31I wasn't here at the time to have properly operated a D R I per se, but I believe that was also the the the way in which D R I's were being

   StarkeyChair

   3:23:41Yeah, but I I sat on the l the local planning agency as when I was on the school board. Approving DRIs? And and I've I've watched and Chris Is what's his last name?

   Joel

   3:23:54Williams. Williams.

   StarkeyChair

   3:23:55You want to answer?

   Joel

   3:23:56May may I answer that based on testimony in the record. Yeah. In the record Chris Williams, who not only is a Planning Commission member on behalf of the school district, but Mr. Williams was asked this question in the on the record And he said two things. He said number one that yes, absolutely. When they had the DRI and the MPUD, they input all the single family, all the multifamily, and of course they had planned on that. For their needs. And he said, secondly,

   3:24:27that empirically as we stand now, he does have existing capacity. in the school system to serve these additional students. So he actually confirmed both. And number one, you of course look at those requirements. You can't get your DRI and your MPUD approved without it. I mean I that's what I do for a living. You can't get it approved. But more importantly, he testified on the record that they have current capacity for schools. So that's another red hair.

   StarkeyChair

   3:24:53Yes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   3:24:54Except for this DRI was approved in August nineteenth of nineteen eighty-six. Can we so you

   Moore

   3:25:01can I continue with Mr. Ronnie?

   Joel

   3:25:03His testimony in the record was that he had factored in the total MPD density for Seven Oaks in their school needs analysis. At whatever point is

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   3:25:16my only problem with what you just said. Is it was done in this DRI? It wouldn't have been done in this DRI because of its age. Mr. Williams may in fact have said he's looked at it in current times. Yeah. But I think this isn't this would be an invested DRI. His statement was that

   Joel

   3:25:35what okay, however you get there, his his testimony was that the MPUD density the school district had factored in to their school needs for this area and that he had current capacity to meet this project. Okay. Alright, I think we got that one answer. Go ahead,

   StarkeyChair

   3:25:52Commissioner Oakley.

   Moore

   3:25:55Is that good? Historically, you know, I remember back in uh 2018, for example, um, this board voted down a conditional use request on fifty-two. And we I think we remember that. It was before Commissioner Fitzpatrick was here. It was actually a three-two vote. Um even dating back then, I'm not gonna go through every vote we did. I have every vote I've ever done on the department complex. It's pretty consistent on that fifty-four-fifty-six corridor. Um But we had concerns even in that area along 52 where you were taking essentially what again what

   3:26:25was a job creating site and converting that to multifamily. This isn't the only spot. Lord knows if you if you if you watch the meetings and you pay attention, I only say this every meeting practically, um But you know, we're in a situation again, like I've talked about before, we're eventually gonna run out of these job creating sites. We're over em you heard testimony from people um that came up here and you heard testimony from folks uh online today about the lack in that

   3:26:55Wesley Chapel area, the lack of office space for people to rent now. Um I have people that come to the area on a consistent basis, you know, and you know, just like they'll reach out to a lot of people that are whether they're in government or economic development, hey do you know of any place that we can rent two thousand or five thousand square foot? It's hard to come by now, right? So for us to continue again continue To rezone these properties that can provide those jobs for the people that let's think about the people that are currently here in the county as well. Okay?

   3:27:26You know, you want to drive more people here. So if we go, this was brought up earlier as well. And the applicant mentioned about you know two apartment complexes, I'm just gonna expand it out um you know on on a good golf day. I I could hit, I think, every one of those from that site with my driver. There's already four apartment complexes there. Now what you probably don't know, but it is public record, so I'll bring it up. Um because I do follow the the pre app meetings of what's coming a coming in front of us in the future. Now this probably won't fall on my shoulders, but it will some

   3:27:56of you. Um some folks mentioned the site in the rear of Seven Oaks, which is already zoned for multifamily. This c this came up last time too. Um well guess what? There um there is there was actually a pre app meeting um And I just lost that, I apologize. Um a pre-app meeting recently on that site and back of uh Seven Oaks. That was done on April 26th, 2022, on Eagle

   3:28:27Stone Boulevard, backed up to 75. So we talked about there's only so many apartments that are have been built or currently been built. The entitlement's already there. It's gonna continue to happen. That does not have to come in front of this board. They're there. That's gonna be that's administrative a hundred percent. Am I not right, Terry? The zoning's there, the multi-family zoning's there, unless they try to deviate from what it currently is, they'll just go through the process, it won't come up here, and they build tomorrow. After they submit their site planning things. Um I

   3:28:57don't know if they I don't think they uh mention. Hold on one sec here. Let me see what uh They I I don't see that in the uh the meeting notes. How many oh here it is 370. I got 370.

   StarkeyChair

   3:29:10Is that part of the C D D district?

   Moore

   3:29:11It is. It's in the back. So they are asking for 370 units on Eagleson, and that's the site back that backs up to 75. It's the one where you saw probably tons of campaign signs um recently during during the election. Um that's that site. So when we talk about So many uh um units being available, well some of that's gonna come Whether you like it or not, it's gonna happen. I mean it's gonna happen. So they're they're they have the ability to do that. Let me just keep going. With all

   Fitzpatrick

   3:29:40those are those under seventeen twenty still?

   Moore

   3:29:43Oh I don't I'm not doing those numbers right now. I I can pull out my calculator in a second, but we talk about you know the need and the the need in the area. I know this was brought up um by s some folks um on the on the on the dais last time about this need. We have four right there. I mean Clustered together. You have another one that's gonna be built in the back. I'm not going to go over all this. I won't bore you too much, but I'll give you an example of the quote need that's in the area. This was done on a market analysis done

   3:30:13on 109. The Enclave at Wasley Chapel, twenty-one apartments available for immediate movement. Bontera Park Departments, 12 units listed is available now. M M MAA, formerly known as Colonial Grain, I think that's the one that's behind the brewery, if I'm not correct. That's part of that, actually Seven Oaks. Um 22 unit unit units, two three bedroom units, starting today is what they say on the website. Windsor Club, which is right there, just says now available. One, two, and three-bedroom units doesn't give a

   3:30:43number. Delano at Cypress Creek, which is down the street. Park of Wesley Chapel eight.

   3:30:53And then seven or two bedrooms. I'll just do a couple more six units available at the horizon of Wiregrass Ranch, Tappersea Cypress, Cypress Creek, advertising for a free month rent and more incentives because they need people to move in today. Land O'Reilly at Cypress Creek pop up on their website offering reduced rates on one bedrooms. About eight units available, I think is what they showed, 15 units available at Terrabella. go on and on and on at how much availability there is in that market right now.

   3:31:23So where's the need? Again, is the need for more office of commercial or is the need for additional multifamily units that really don't benefit the citizens of Pasco County. Therefore, we want to benefit citizens of Pasco County, we need to leave these uh leave these parcels commercial or office. And I'll I'll stop for a while before I go to the next next thing.

   Oakley

   3:31:48Yeah. Um In the rebuttal, I think Joel too answered some of the questions I had about the parking issue before when this project when we first looked at it was asking forgiveness on on parking spaces. They've gone vertical, so they've got more spaces in there for that so they're not asking for forgiveness. They're gonna provide a playground for the kids. They also have a dog park in this property. They one of the big concerns I had

   3:32:18was safety on this property because that road going in between the two buildings on this property and they have addressed that. I also believe in my own mind that Walmart is for safety to their pedestrians and people traveling in between this project and and their stores to do business and I would think they would would be welcoming anything to make it safer for their pedestrians coming into their stores. So uh it's a better fit

   3:32:48on this site than it was prior. So You look.

   StarkeyChair

   3:32:54Okay. Um I had some questions. Um and Joel if you could stand up there with them, you can both answer these together. And I almost I almost have a question for your client because they are the well let me first ask the clients a question. If you don't mind.

   Joel

   3:33:14This is um most of you've met him. Keith Gelder who's in charge of their uh multifamily division for stock development in Naples. They're

   StarkeyChair

   3:33:22the helper. And first I want to say I hope that um knowing that you guys are from Naples, condolences to um probably some crazy stuff that you went through and I hope you and your family and your company's families are all okay.

   Barbara Wilhite

   3:33:36Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   3:33:37Um If I is this your first apartment complex that you're building?

   Keith Elder

   3:33:42No, ma'am. Uh sorry, Keith Gelder, uh Stockton film the applicant. I have not yet been sworn. Oh sorry. Sorry.

   StarkeyChair

   3:33:49Well done, let me edit.

   3:33:52Different oaths for different things. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give is it the truth? So help you God. I too. Thank

   Keith Elder

   3:33:57you. Thank you. No, we've uh built several projects. We've completed uh over a thousand units. Um so four to six projects we've completed today. We're actively under construction.

   StarkeyChair

   3:34:07Right. Um so w would you build an apartment complex that wouldn't Be needed? I I because that's a business question, I guess.

   Keith Elder

   3:34:17Yeah, no uh absolutely not. No, we um do a lot of study and and market research for our properties um and take great care in selecting what we believe um are great sites uh that are demand and be good fit for multifamily property. properties.

   StarkeyChair

   3:34:31All right. Well that that was kind of my main question. When he he was was when when Commissioner Commissioner Moore was citing those numbers, numbers just just because because we've been going through and learning a lot about apartment complexes um To to have a three hundred, four hundred unit apartment complex and have twenty units available, that's I think that's people moving in, people moving out. Kind of a pi someone would say that's full. I think. I'm not an apartment person, but is that

   Keith Elder

   3:35:00Yeah, typically I mean um you know stabilized occupancy is typically around ninety three percent is what most market research firms um would uh will consider fully stabilized. So um yeah typically you know when your leases renew and you know Um you have units that that turn over. So um it's not realistic to be at a hundred percent occupancy on any property.

   StarkeyChair

   3:35:23Okay. Although I I have people calling me asking me to help them get on the apartments that my brother in law built in downtown New Port Richey Um Okay, I think that's all I have for you. I just knew you were an apartment builder and had those questions.

   Moore

   3:35:40But but um I if you remember, and this has come up because this was actually used, I'm not gonna s I don't want to quote you because I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure in the past, you know, at meetings, somebody on this dais did mention that there were waiting lists for a lot of the apartment complexes. Point I'm I'm trying to prove here is that there's not the waiting list anymore, guys. Times have changed.

   Fitzpatrick

   3:36:06It depends on the area.

   Moore

   3:36:07Well I just okay well I will give you this. Yeah I agree the area. So in that area on fifty four and fifty-six, and then you go down to Bruce Bowns and you go on Westley Chapel Boulevard you'll see what the availability is. So you're correct. It depends on the area because there may be a spot on US nineteen which is thirty five miles away um that might have a lot of vacancy right now. But I'm just giving you these are real numbers. They didn't they're not fake. You can go on the website yourself. I'll leave it here for everybody to view at a later date.

   StarkeyChair

   3:36:36My guess is that um Uh When These kind of developers are looking at an area they look to see what's coming. And we have Hundreds. Thousands of jobs coming. And they gotta live somewhere. And if you try and rent a house right now, good luck. So we do not have the The housing capacity for all the jobs that are coming. But listen I I

   3:37:06I I don't wanna see our uh apartment complex on every block. I I I and I wish we had More variety coming in. I mean I I've said it here before, we c every single development that we're seeing is forty foot loss. Which I don't like either. I think we need a variety. I think we need multifamily, I think we need town homes, we need garden homes. We need I'd like to see one acre lots. I know that's sprawl, so I don't want to see a lot of them, Terry. Um, but you know, half

   3:37:36acre lots or, you know, res three, res four. Um and I I think we did a good thing asking people when they come in to do forty, fifties and and sixties maybe, and you can't only do forties. We just need a little more variety. Absolutely. And You know, when I look at your neighborhood, which is a gorgeous neighborhood And I look at some neighborhoods in Starkey Ranch in the back Um I I've had people of high income Well I'm gonna go in down a wrap child here, but I've

   3:38:07of high income um net worth that want to move to our county because I think we've done an amazing job. And And this is kind of a call out to you developers. We need some more housing for those people.

   3:38:22We need workforce housing too. Inclusionary housing.

   Fitzpatrick

   3:38:24Yes too.

   StarkeyChair

   3:38:25Now these apartments are not workforce housing. I I'm gonna guess you're at sixty. I don't know what what your minimum rents gonna be. It's not workforce housing, but it is Solving a problem. Um so here are some of the questions I have. Okay, so someone The gentleman that did a great job that kicked off this presentation said It's a it's a master plan modification, not a rezoning. Did we do something wrong? Did we do it right? What's what's going on with that? I don't care who answers it. That's my question. I

   3:38:56just want to make sure we didn't answer something.

   Oakley

   3:38:58David can answer

   Joel

   3:38:59it. I can tell it what I applied for.

   StarkeyChair

   3:39:02Who's your question for? Well did we did we my application so are we doing something wrong here today? 'Cause I don't I don't know and if someone brought did some research and thinks we do, I I want an answer.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   3:39:13It is a substantial zoning amendment. So you're not doing anything wrong. You're you're hearing this the proper way. Okay. I don't wanna

   Fitzpatrick

   3:39:21bend the zone.

   StarkeyChair

   3:39:22Um Then um let's see here on that flume thing And I think this is a good one. Oh LUM, not Flume.

   3:39:32No, the do we do we have we do have a Flume. Future Land Use

   Moore

   3:39:36something.

   StarkeyChair

   3:39:39We have a lot of acronyms and there's no more room up here to fit anything more in here. on the loom. Am I saying that right? And this is the first project that I've really heard the loom, though I know you've used it and now at the um project on fifty two. Um Have we ever I mean usually it's done administratively. And someone said there were sixteen in here in this area? Have

   3:40:09we approved these in other places too?

   Oakley

   3:40:14So a land use equivalency matrix is set up so that you can make land use exchanges.

   StarkeyChair

   3:40:21And

   Oakley

   3:40:21have we done that

   StarkeyChair

   3:40:22in other DRIs and C D Dis and developments, M PUDs?

   Oakley

   3:40:27If they have them. Yeah, if they're set up,

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   3:40:30if they were built into the original approval. They there is a land use equivalency matrix that can be used.

   StarkeyChair

   3:40:37Okay. Have we denied one?

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   3:40:43Okay, but let me clarify. So He's correct, but in some of the more recent MPs we've approved. We don't allow certain conversions. So some of them are now this is an older one. But in some of the more recent MPDs we don't allow people to convert non residential uses to residential uses. because of the economic impact. So if we

   StarkeyChair

   3:41:06made that

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   3:41:06so so in the original approval of some of these recent MPDs, we're not allowing this type of conversion. But this is an ol this is an older D R I though that doesn't have that prohibition. The reason it's before you though Isn't because it's prohibited, it's because they're changing the zoning map.

   StarkeyChair

   3:41:24Right, but and we made a policy that said if you're going to change it Um no we will allow it if you put retail

   3:41:37No, that was retail office.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   3:41:43That's why I'm not a land. That was a change to the C two zoning district, but this this is not a C two zoning district. This is an M P U D okay.

   Fitzpatrick

   3:41:49And Madam Chair discussing this, I think this might help. They have converted multifamily to commercial and multifamily to medical within the This DRI, but now that they're trying to convert the commercial to the multifamily, now it's in a question. Is that correct?

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   3:42:07Did they I missed the question, I'm sorry.

   StarkeyChair

   3:42:10Was there commercial that was converted?

   Fitzpatrick

   3:42:13Multifamily has been converted to multifamily and commercial has and multifamily has also been converted to medical.

   Moore

   3:42:21It was an ALF. It's an ALF nursing home. Oh so we've gone

   StarkeyChair

   3:42:26one way now. Okay. All right, um let's see here.

   3:42:34Density. Okay, so Um I sent you I sent you a couple pictures, Mike, if you could put those up and this kind of goes to the people in the community. I live on the west side.

   3:42:49And uh I think of a community that I drive through every day, Starkey Ranch. And um I will tell you that there is a beautiful not as beautiful as the one they're gonna build. Um Apartment complex that my daughter was renting a place from and Terry Our planning director was running a place for them. Right at the entrance of the subdivision, which is One of the number one master plan communities in the United States.

   3:43:20So uh it's right out front, right next to our publics. It's right there. Um you can see it right there. Um and then you got the publics and all that stuff right across the street. So it's right at the entrance to Starkey Ranch. And then I know down the street where um our former county administrator lived in Asturias also, right at the entrance to the subdivision. apartments. I think when you find when you look at

   3:43:51new master plan communities, that's typically where you're gonna find them. And I don't know why some of you say there's land inside Seven Oaks. I don't know why you'd want that in the middle. So that all I looked at it and S and Um th there's lots on the inside and S and something something that could be multifamily if it wanted to be. Um Because I think that was part of this loom conversation. And And

   3:44:22I don't know why you'd want those inside and not on the outside and not driving through everything. So For me, I I i it's just not credible for me to think that This apartment compass is gonna ruin your your property values 'cause you can just start looking up Starkey Ranch and they're through the roof and And they've got 'em there and they're gonna have 'em on the other end and they're gonna have 'em across the street. Now, I agree with Commissioner Moore. We can't overdo it. And we have to be careful. And I think we're being we

   3:44:52really gotta be careful with our C two. Um But this is is this is this is a commercial area that has had nothing on it. and and is restricted and the and the Bartolo family who would think some of us know they've been trying to sell this. It's them, right, that had this lot, not this year's?

   Moore

   3:45:11They

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:11were there for one more

   Mike Ford

   3:45:13owned the other one.

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:14I I actually had uh two conversations with one of your residents who's against this property, and he told me he was sixteen years in commercial um real estate and considers himself somewhat an expert in He d tells me that The parcels here, the re the commercial parcels are not doing well, and that no one goes to the Sam's Club. That's what he told me. No one goes to the

   Moore

   3:45:38Sam's Club? What?

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:40Oh

   Moore

   3:45:40my god. I

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:41don't know. That's what he told me.

   Moore

   3:45:43People drive from Dade City to go to the Sams Club. You go, you try to get it. I heard that

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:46about your Costco.

   Moore

   3:45:47There was a no Costco's gonna be close to that.

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:49I'm just telling you what you're I'm not gonna say his name.

   Moore

   3:45:50There's a line around the club. I'm not gonna say

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:52your name. I was gonna tell you what he told me. You

   Moore

   3:45:54yeah, go with I invite anyone to go with.

   StarkeyChair

   3:45:59So anyway, I I just wanna kinda tell you why I was for it before. And I I I'm still for it now. Um And I I appreciate that you've improved it. I think that safety for the pedestrians is important. Um, and um Madam Chair, can I ask a few questions? Well, I think Commissioner Fitzpatrick was and then you can go Commissioner Oakley. I do agree. I

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:46:23haven't had once in a round yet.

   StarkeyChair

   3:46:25I know but she has to be a little bit more than a little bit

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:46:26each one of us once and then go back to the other that hit. I haven't said a word yet.

   StarkeyChair

   3:46:30I was going like this.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:46:32Go Go ahead.

   StarkeyChair

   3:46:33You you'll have plenty of time. I'll make quick.

   Fitzpatrick

   3:46:35So I do see the parking improvements, the playground improvements, the school district member is on board at the Planning Commission. I do agree with Commissioner Oakley and as well. Um Speaking in the past, they have brought up they do consider apartments at 95% um capacity as full. So 95% of 100 would leave five additional apartments. So if there are 400, then yes, you're gonna have 20 extra apartments and that

   3:47:05would be considered full occupancy. Um I do think we are still in a housing crisis right now. We do need Make sure we have affordability and affordable housing for our current citizens that live here already and even our citizens today are having trouble finding housing. whether their um lease agreement is up or whatever the case may be. We have our own citizens trying to find living in apartment um living in people that make

   3:47:35decent money living in hotels because there's no housing units or apartments for them to move into. So I think it's really important that we make sure we do have housing for our citizens. Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   3:47:48Mr. Mariano.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:47:50Thank you. Um can you go to slide twenty-four?

   3:47:55Of which presentation? Of the presentation from the citizens.

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   3:47:59Seth Weightman

   3:48:03And it's like fun.

   StarkeyChair

   3:48:07Hillsboro's bedroom.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:48:24I want you to look at that slide. And I want you to consider something. Eighteen years ago when I first ran for County Commission, we were known as a bedroom community. We didn't have enough jobs, everybody had to commute. At that time as well, I will tell you, Wesley Chapel was buried with traffic. All the way through. We had all sorts of issues out there. Go look at Pasco County to the top of the map. We are other than Citrus County We have the least amount of people that work and live in the same city, county. Okay,

   3:48:54look at that number. That's right. We just had a presentation from David Engel telling us through T Paper Regional Planning Council plus his own presentation is telling us how though we've created a lot of jobs. We're way behind where we need to be. Way behind. We need more jobs here. The space that we have that's good commercial, we should be focusing on. This parcel, frankly, should be Class A office, period. We don't need any mixed. I've got all the mixed use. Seven Oaks is probably the best community ever

   3:49:24built in Pasco County, maybe the world, as far as I'm concerned. The way it's set up. I mean before Mudderum came in? They were doing it. They were keeping their jobs Uh their trips confined into the community so less traffic would go up and around. Everything's still got built around it because being built account.

   3:49:45It's I'm just saying what they do is they keep they've kept their retail and the commercial support in there where people don't always drive out. I mean you've got ma many major Many well off people there have picked up for a place to live. Um When you look at that number that we're there, we should be going against that. And this is a classic example of why not to switch. Um again, David Engel showed us we are very we're doing great creating jobs, but with the people that are moving in, we're not keeping up. We're gonna we're gonna make a move

   3:50:15on that. Um If you want to look at Vertical infill mixed use. Terry, I let me ask you a question. Why? Knowing and let me just talk about SAMS Club in a minute. Uh right now. Sam's Club is so busy. I used to go get gas there all the time. I stopped going.

   StarkeyChair

   3:50:33In Wesley Chapel?

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:50:34In West Well, if I'm in the area I would s I would go there. I mean it's Fifteen, twenty cents less a gallon, I'll I'll go into Samsung. And we we shop there as well. It is so busy in there, I don't go in there anymore. You can't get in, you can't get out. You drive up to the parking area, it's jam-packed. You can't get out. And as they say, you got all those lanes of traffic getting around. It's a major product getting in and getting out. So You need to try it before you make the comments or rely on other people. I've been I've been there. It's Packed, as the people have said, who live there. Um

   3:51:06Terry, on the development, is there anything set up between as the s the sh slideshow said between north, south, and central as far as how they spaced out where the apartments were going to go? Is there any relevance to that?

   Oakley

   3:51:20I I'm not sure I'm following the question.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:51:22On one of the slides it one of the slides it talked about how there was apartments designated for north, south and central part of this massive development. Is there any truth to that? Cash. Was it designed that way?

   Oakley

   3:51:34Yeah, there are uh Parcels at the northern end of Seven Oaks that were identified for as either a primary or an alternate use for multifamily. And I think there was towards the middle area along the Bruce B. Downs edge. Um where there was a similar setup for either primary or alternate multifamily uses on those parcels. So it was structured north south central as well.

   3:52:10S eighteen, which was just to the north, that previously had the the uh multifamily as alternate use, but which went office.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:52:22M my main question is about the spacing of the apartments in the complex. Did they do north, south, and central when they set the D R I up? Y it appears so, yes. Okay. So this is gonna actually aff affect that the other way. You're gonna put more down down to the south.

   Oakley

   3:52:37Well as I mentioned the S eighteen, which is just to the north of S ninete, um, it had the multifamily entitlement on it, but that eva that went office. It developed as office. It didn't develop as well, so it d so it doesn't really matter. Yeah, so the multifamily that was at the south edge was di was reduced because of the because S eighteen went to office. Sorry, so it doesn't matter then.

   Joel

   3:53:00No, it does matter. If I may, that's a great point. They had multifamily designated to the South End. Our adjacent parcel north of us was converted from multifamily to office, so you've got your office in that area. And us putting that back on S-19 is entirely consistent with that original plan. I mean that's a great point. What we're doing is entirely consistent with that because we lost the MALD family on the southern perimeter and it became office already. So you already

   3:53:31already have the office that was contemplated in that area.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:53:35Thank you. So we've done a good job creating more office and switching out apartments. Why would we want to go backwards when we're still at a shortage of jobs? Um Vertical infill. Right now you've got like you're limiting or you're not making them do the full amount of parking spaces normally required. Why would you do that?

   Oakley

   3:53:55Well, I think that's a good thing. The MPUD has the condition in there that a allows for a parking ratio of one point nine uh spaces per unit I believe. And that is the that is the typical parking requirement that we um approve in MPUDs. Uh it is a variation from the code. So it is it the code has been.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:54:25Um

   StarkeyChair

   3:54:26I'll I'll make a note.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:54:27My administrator. Planning director. Planning sorry. Uh so one two point two five is the norm that we have set up and you're you're letting it go down. You're are you accounting for the retail that's coming down below and making them do the appropriate parking spots you would on a normal development?

   Moore

   3:54:47That's what I was about to ask too, so I was curious. Yeah.

   Oakley

   3:54:51Well I haven't looked at the exact site plans but yes. I would say yes we are accounting because if you're providing for twenty five thousand square feet you have to apply the appropriate uh commercial parking. So they're gonna they're they're gonna meet the the normal standard. Yeah and and if I recall from from from the January version When the parking deck was initially uh proposed as part of the initial vertical integrated mixed use building concept, there was a portion of the parking deck that was

   3:55:22uh specifically um designated to serve for commercial parking purposes.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:55:28Okay. Now as far as the density it was talked about the density, this is like they say double the density of what's in the seven oats already? Relative to the other apartments?

   Oakley

   3:55:38Um I'm not sure about double the density of seven oaks. The Typical uh apartment complex that comes in is about two hundred and fifty to three hundred and fifty uh units. So this is typical.

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:55:51But I'm talking about what's what's in in in seven oaks right now. What's what's compatible to it? Uh is this more dense?

   Oakley

   3:55:58I would say that this is uh Well, if I can finish my statement and then I'll I can answer that. So this this comes in at about three hundred and twenty multifamily units, which is pretty much in that range, but on ten point six acres, which increases the the density number on the site. So f at ten point six acres I think it's something like Uh not great math, about thirty or so dwelling units per acre. So it's more it's more

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:56:25dense than what you've got.

   Oakley

   3:56:27In that sense, yes. So

   MarianoVice Chair

   3:56:28you're gonna change the complex of how the neighborhood goes. Um

   3:56:35As far as like not being able to sell the property as Commissioner Starkey had mentioned We saw this situation before in the target piece over by 41 where it diverges off, where target had all these conditions put in. that made it hard for us to go sell so we had to put more apartments in down there.

   3:56:53It was the first going for that. They have limited themselves as far as the retail. When they bought the property, whoever bought the property, they should have known what those conditions were what was going on to it. Called buyer beware, I believe it is. And again, this is not affordable housing. This is this is high end housing. Um

   3:57:17I mean uh I j I just think that this county needs more jobs. We're taking away prime, prime real estate for jobs. Um I'm very comfortable with all the reasons we had for denial from before. Um and I think we should be dying again.

   StarkeyChair

   3:57:35Um

   Fitzpatrick

   3:57:36Um,

   StarkeyChair

   3:57:37did you wanna say something?

   Fitzpatrick

   3:57:38Because um 'cause I have talking about the loom with the land use equivalency matrix and That kind of made their case stronger. basically stating that they did convert the multifamily to office and now they want to convert this back to multifamily. I'm not okay with making an agreement whether it was from nineteen eighty six or not. that this is what they were allotted, but now we're gonna take away what they were allotted in their original D R I agreement.

   Moore

   3:58:06Who's that?

   Fitzpatrick

   3:58:07The D R I.

   Moore

   3:58:09Is that but who's

   Fitzpatrick

   3:58:10equivalent to matrix?

   Moore

   3:58:11Well I know what it is, but who's that?

   3:58:15Is there a D R I there still?

   Fitzpatrick

   3:58:16What was was that?

   Moore

   3:58:17Is that still within a D R A?

   Fitzpatrick

   3:58:19Are you still within D R I? Yes.

   Moore

   3:58:22Oh yeah.

   StarkeyChair

   3:58:23Okay, so I have a question. Um so on the parking numbers and um to Commissioner Mariano's question I know Terry when I have you in every meeting that I can get you it's probably ninety five percent when I meet with developers um to try and make each project be the best it can be and we We we go over a lot of things and parking is one of them. And um

   3:58:54I think What a

   3:58:58consistent things we talked about in my meetings, especially with multifamily, is that we our parking requirements are too Um Big. And I asked them to reduce the parking requirements. And what and I think you're working on reducing that, ratio. What are we gonna go to?

   Oakley

   3:59:18Well well we yes, we are working on revising our parking standards in the Land Development Code. Um is a project of opportunity for fiscal year twenty three um that the Planning Development Department is pursuing because we have a pretty long track track record. of reducing requirements to certain ratios like this one point nine we're talking about today. Uh I don't know where the ultimate ratio is going to land, although you could uh reasonably anticipate

   3:59:48somewhere in the neighborhood of one point nine. Um but the parking study is going to be undertaken over the next couple of months. We should be uh probably by May ish complete with uh a draft of what of what those will look like once we've studied all the the numbers.

   MarianoVice Chair

   4:00:07Sure. My daughters were living in Orlando. They had a three bedroom place, they had two parking spots. They had another one you could actually go try to find if you went down, because their limits were lower than ours. I think it's a super dangerous move. I won't support lowering it down to the one point nine because two point two five is a good number. If we're the highest of that, so be it. It's better to have too much parking than too little because you have too little parking, what you're gonna have is that tow truck driver that was here, the one that had more spots. He's

   4:00:38gonna be towing those spots off the same parking lot because people can park in there. That's right. You're gonna create a mess. Two point five is a good number.

   StarkeyChair

   4:00:44We we've been approving way too many in my opinion, and um there are some developments and some projects that don't have enough. I would tell you the new Mitchell Ranch Plaza whatever it's called across the street, where the sprouts is? There's not enough parking in there. But the one across the street with the target? There's never anybody but homeless people on the one in the parking lot over by nineteen. Um but I have a next another question for you and then I'm gonna call call for the vote. And this is kinda to all of us. And

   4:01:15I and I understand that It's a beautiful community and Commissioner Moore I know it's your community. Well

   Moore

   4:01:22th no no no th I don't talk about listen, this is ridiculous. Well I'll take

   StarkeyChair

   4:01:26that

   Moore

   4:01:27you know, 'cause I don't talk about where you live and things like this. I live a mile and a half away from there. So this community is bigger than the city of Port Ritchie. It doesn't matter where I live.

   StarkeyChair

   4:01:34So um I don't know when

   Moore

   4:01:36Jesus

   StarkeyChair

   4:01:37when we think that it's not a good place to put m multifamily next to all those offices. And that those people can just walk or ride their bike right to work. There are hundreds of offices right next to it. And then we're going to go. We have A Sams Club next door. I mean It it's We just approved apartments next to a target. I mean I don't know why that's not W when they had

   4:02:07if this were coming in today, that's where they would have been. That is where they put 'em in a mi in in a M P U D's uh they put 'em out in the front like that. um next to jobs that are all rounded. So You know, I think we have to be consistent. I think we have to be careful. Um because

   4:02:28We we we can and will get sued when we're not consistent with then we're gonna I'm not gonna ask for

   MarianoVice Chair

   4:02:34the I I I just wanna bring something to you. Years ago we had all sorts of trouble with traffic in Wesley Chapel. And Commissioner Moore, you've heard him talk about trying to go from Seven Oaks up to the Groves, 45 minute drive. You were just with me in Miami when we had to go three miles and it took us 45 minutes by bus. Right? These people don't want that congestion. We just spent thank you Commissioner for bringing it up We just put it we're just finishing up the diverging diamond. Try driving up from fifty-six or from down south

   4:03:05of Tampa up seventy five and taking a right turn. Right. Now that that's in place it's improving. Why do we spend all this money making these improvements and we're just gonna go throw more density? We need more jobs. So so

   StarkeyChair

   4:03:17there in the development word d world there are entitlements. And this project has entitlements. And we and so I know that it it's a hurdle that they have to get through to come through us, but I feel that that We could be in trouble. And I'm looking at the traffic right now. And for some reason, Commissioner Weightman I don't know the the red is coming out of Ancient Oaks. Um but there's all those people

   Moore

   4:03:47at Sam's Club, they don't go to Sam's Club.

   StarkeyChair

   4:03:50There's no there's no orange or red going into Sam's Club or into Ancient Oaks, so I don't know what the story is there. But um part of that traffic um issue that I think will get helped over on that side is um Our delay in Westy Chapel Boulevard, widening that. And um thank you. I ha I have that. And I looked at I looked at this. It was a great presentation. And um the uh overpass interchange. I think all of that will help relieve

   4:04:20The traffic here. Um but I would go back to my Mantra that I've said to this board before. If you're concerned about traffic issues, you gotta have connectivity and and Every time we vote to close the road? And not have things connect. Everyone has to get out on these roads and I and you know That's why I

   Moore

   4:04:42chair can can we can I

   Fitzpatrick

   4:04:44with the traffic study. Well I know the traffic study. You had mentioned that there was a traffic study and it's gonna be more congestion with these

   4:04:55But isn't there a traffic study comparison that says if they have this amount of office space it's gonna cause this amount of traffic and with this project is gonna cause this amount. I thought we were not allowed to put any additional traffic onto the roads, then what it is originally zone four as well. So they are not creating any additional traffic congestion, whether it was For businesses or for

   4:05:25the multifamilies. In addition, how much are the mobility fees coming in and can't we utilize or can't we state that those mobility fees have to be utilized in that specific area?

   Jim White

   4:05:38Yeah.

   Fitzpatrick

   4:05:39To make specific improvements in that area?

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:05:44So operating. So You're correct that the Loom request when they convert they could they're converting commercial entitlements to residential, that has to be trip neutral.

   Fitzpatrick

   4:05:56Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:05:58So they're not generating additional capacity trips. But they could create additional access related concerns, but from a capacity standpoint it has to be neutral. Okay.

   StarkeyChair

   4:06:08So thank

   Fitzpatrick

   4:06:08you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:06:08Did I answer your question?

   StarkeyChair

   4:06:09Mm-hmm.

   4:06:13Thanks just And then Commissioner Oakley. No he he had asked for

   Moore

   4:06:16Mm-hmm. Okay.

   StarkeyChair

   4:06:17I

   Moore

   4:06:17know. Um since since um you know you did mention about you know where people live and things like that, I'm gonna kinda ha I wasn't gonna do this, but I'm gonna do it. So so if you look at votes, I mean 2018 there was a three-two vote to deny that project we talked about on fifty-two. It held up. Nobody came back and appealed, nobody sued. October twenty Um second, 2019, I voted to deny the Aiken MPD for the same for similar reasons. Again, the commercial,

   4:06:47the job, the job loss on that site. 2021, Hay Road, same situation. I voted to deny that. That was industrial. 2021, 4-1 vote. Yes, I was the only nay, but a similar situation. 15th MPD rezoned 4-1 on that one. Conditional use north of Bruce B. Downs. That was a 3-2 actually. Um similar situation. That was commercial. There was concerns about that. January 11th, went back to Hayes Road again. I voted to deny that. I'm not gonna go over home and I can keep I can keep going. But

   4:07:18you know Varmaan ensikökin. Let's I'm ready for a boat here, but here's what I'm not gonna do. Well I obviously I know Commissioner Fitzpatrick's for it. I know you're for it. Are you voting for it?

   Theodore Rhodes

   4:07:31Yes.

   Moore

   4:07:31You're voting for it? Okay, so I'm not gonna make a motion to deny because I'm not gonna give anybody the satisfaction of being a three-two vote because I sounds like Commissioner Mary Arnold already said he's gonna vote with it. So I'm not gonna make the motion to deny. I'll let one of you guys make the motion to approve and not vote to deny it on that.

   Oakley

   4:07:45Can I can I make a before we don't want to make a statement that cover what you were talking about before? Uh the fact of it is is if you'll reach out to David Engel you'll find out that we got more jobs coming here in the near future. Coming to fifty two and some other areas in our county. and we do not have the right housing. in our county to be able to keep our employees or workers in our county. But the growth is coming. Pasco Town Center, the project over on the north

   4:08:16side of 52, and there's many more right if you go right out past Bellum in that area too. They are coming. With those jobs. And we don't have the housing, enough house. You'd think we got too much housing now, but the fact of it is we don't have enough housing to house these workers that we need to be working in our county. And that's the best for our economy. And with that, I will move for approval.

   StarkeyChair

   4:08:41Second.

   MarianoVice Chair

   4:08:42More discussion, please.

   StarkeyChair

   4:08:43Under discussion?

   MarianoVice Chair

   4:08:45Under discussion. As far as David Engel and his report, even with all the jobs when he was here, we still don't have enough jobs to keep up. Okay. This is prime real estate for j creating jobs, right where it's located. Right. We got people driving down to Tampa all the time. We should be trying to put a shift back the other way.

   StarkeyChair

   4:09:02So you

   MarianoVice Chair

   4:09:02want more

   4:09:03traffic there? 'Cause that's what you're doing.

   4:09:06I want to f

   4:09:06no,

   4:09:06I want to finish. I want more jobs so people don't have to drive down there, they can stay right here and live and work in and play in the wrong place. Like this chart right here shows you, we're at the bottom of the list. So the jobs we are creating are great. The stuff that's going on with the uh the employ the the other em the other housing we have going on is great. You get a development's already here. Jammed with traffic everywhere. The whole development's jam. Sams Club, you can't even get in. So all that said, with David Ingall, et cetera, and it's a big thing. Now I want

   4:09:36to tell you this and Commissioner Weight actually covered it, I think, pretty well. But we're in a situation of this matrix. They put us in this position to make this decision. Just because someone comes before us, as Commissioner We says, we don't have to approve it. We don't have to accept it. We don't Our attorney. Which I sent to you guys. A copy of the reasons for the Resolution denying the MPD zoning amendment request for the property described in rezoning petition seventy-five oh seven. I sent you that after talking to David. The

   4:10:08conditions we had for denial are still appropriate. They would still hold up in his opinion. Correct. David, correct me if I'm wrong.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:10:16Yeah.

   4:10:18There might need to be some minor modifications to some of the facts because some of the facts have changed. But in general I would say yes, if the board wanted to deny it.

   MarianoVice Chair

   4:10:29So don't be in the position. Yep. And Commissioner Fitzpatrick, think about this. These people in West State Chapel are a huge block of people. Okay? I don't know if you've looked at the results of your actions you've had before from things here, but I'm telling you, these people here are very in tune to what's going on. They're gonna look at what's going on. They're looking at these things. They're here. They are s I mean The presentation they put on is phen phenomenal. These people here don't want it. They've seen it. And I think it's so important that you think about this

   4:10:59because this is going to affect this neighborhood for a long, long time. You'll never get it back.

   StarkeyChair

   4:11:04Okay, sorry. I've got a medical thing, so I'm gonna gotta get going. So um I'm uh all in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed?

   Moore

   4:11:16Nay.

   StarkeyChair

   4:11:18And we are adjourned. Oh no,

   Moore

   4:11:20Commissioner

   StarkeyChair

   4:11:20Oakley.

   Moore

   4:11:21No. So Madam, just one follow up. And David, can you come up real quick? Because I know this question's gonna be this question is gonna be asked. David Mm. Can we ask a clear file?

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:11:33Okay. Can the clerk confirm that it was a three two vote for approval of the motion before we get this question? Yes.

   Chelsea Waller Dothri

   4:11:40Yes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:11:44Okay. Thank you. What was your question?

   Moore

   4:11:48Because I'd rather be having on the dais in case I get asked this question, I'd rather be in the public. Um

   4:11:56the attorney or the C D D since they um Miss Waller is the um

   Oakley

   4:12:03Attorney for the C.

   Moore

   4:12:04Attorney for um the C D D. They still have the ability to appeal just like they did, do they not?

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:12:11Third parties do have the right to appeal, yes. And in fact, the conditions of approval contemplate that there could be an appeal because they require the applicant to defend and indemnify the county if that occurs.

   Moore

   4:12:22How long do they have to file the appeal?

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:12:24Generally thirty days.

   Moore

   4:12:26So they have a they have thirty days to file the appeal.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:12:28It tends to but it's from the date that the resolution is rendered, which has to come back from the chair files it with the clerk. So that would probably be today since there was an approval. Right.

   Moore

   4:12:39So they have thirty days to app so this is just a general question. Somebody would have The opposing side would have thirty days to appeal.

   Hannah Lockwood

   4:12:46Mm-hmm.

   Moore

   4:12:46Okay, to submit the appeal. So if it was on day twenty-nine, whatever they submitted it, and then how long Do they how typically how long would it take for that to come back for that appeal hearing?

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:13:00Oh that topic, so there's two forms of challenge and I don't wanna get into too much in details. There's a Sur Shorori type challenge which is an appeal. There's also a what's called a 163 3215 challenge which is challenging the approval as being inconsistent with a comp plan. One of them is a Genovo proceeding that goes to court, like a trial. The other is an appellate proceeding. So those have different time frames, but I would say that The chances of either one of those being resolved in less than a year is slim.

   Moore

   4:13:30Okay. I'm just curious, yeah.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:13:31I'd say on average it's about a year. Yeah. That's just

   Moore

   4:13:34a general question if somebody, you know, in case it does put. I'd

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:13:36say it's

   Moore

   4:13:37probably a

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:13:37year

   Moore

   4:13:38or more for both

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   4:13:39for both of those proceedings, it's probably a year or more before you hear back from the court.

   Moore

   4:13:43Gotcha. All right. Answer my question. Thanks.