PDD-24-7607

Published agenda

Heard once, at the Board of County Commissioners on Nov 14, 2023.

OutcomeApproved by the Board of County Commissioners on Nov 14, 2023

Approved Staff’s recommendation with Commissioner Bradford absent from the vote.

Official title

Zoning Amendment (Regular) - Wildcat Bailes CC-MPUD - Wildcat Groves Inc. - A Rezoning Request From an E-R Estate Residential District to a CC-MPUD Connected City Master Planned Unit Development District to Allow for 1,275 Multi-Family Dwelling units, 155,000 Square Feet of Retail, 150,000 Square Feet of Office, 250,000 Square Feet of Medical Office, 365,000 Square Feet of Hospital, and 250 Hotel Rooms on Approximately 176 Acres

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. 75% of 318 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1Nov 14, 2023
Board of County CommissionersP102Public hearingApproved
Approved minutes
Approved Staff’s recommendation with Commissioner Bradford absent from the vote.
Open this item →
1h 18m
MarianoChair
Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. P one oh two.
OakleyVice Chair
Item P102 was published in the Tampe Times on September 20, 2023.
Gavin Covey
Good afternoon. Gavin Covey planning development.
So this is PDD 247607, the Wildcat Bales Connected City MPUD.
And just give you a quick little background, in April of twenty fifteen, um The Florida State Legislature passed Senate Bill twelve sixteen establishing Pasco County as a pilot program for Connected City. And then subsequently this is a little bit more than a little bit. This board uh adopted the enabling documents including the comprehensive plan, the LTC stewardship district. uh Masteroy plan to carry out the vision of the connected city in Pasco County. So, quick project overview. We're rezoning from an E R estate residential district to a connected city master
plan unit development district. to allow for 1,275 multifamily dwelling units, 155,000 square feet of retail, 150,000 square feet of office, 250,000 square feet of medical office, 365,000 square feet of hospital, and 250 hotel rooms on approximately 176 acres. And so this is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of McKindry Road and Overpass Road. Here's a quick uh look at the site location in comparison to
the county.
Here's a uh location map within Connected City.
And then again, here's our Connected City uh SPA zones. These are our special planning areas. These are basically like our flu designations. As you can see, uh it's in the South Innovation Zone and the Business Core.
Here's just a quick picture of the aerial.
The current zoning, which is E R state residential. Uh the future land use which is E C
And so here's a uh quick picture of the master plan with the Bayles portion. Uh this is gonna have uh I believe five hundred and fifty multifamily units and the rest of the non residential, the hospital, everything else will be on the that southern portion of the property, closer to Overpass.
Uh and just to kind of highlight some of the the the SPA zones uh for Connected City that this is in, uh the business core is supposed to be high density uh high density and intensity, the hospital, the retail, medical office, stuff like that. Um and then it prohibits single family uses in this area because of that intensity and density that we want. Uh for the South Innovation Zone, it's lower to medium density and intensity. Um, you know, height and with some high density multifamily, uh residential,
office, retail, medical, all that for you. Um So yeah, the density and the intensities of this project match up with the SPA zones that they are located in.
And there are a couple of uh the economic development policies that I wanted to point out for this project Uh one being policy ED 3.4. Uh Pasco County will encourage an active or encourage active development and implementation of programs that promote a diversified economy, hospital, office, medical office, all of that will be you know large job creation sites uh for the county. And then again, policy ED 3.7, which is Pasco County will incentivize primary
and target industries generating a minimum of 10 new full-time jobs. Obviously this is a massive hospital that's gonna generate a good amount of jobs for the county. They are requesting a few variations from our code. Section 522.9.p.2. Within the Connected City Land Development Code, residential projects that are four or more stories shall provide a usable open space of not less than 5% of the acreage of the parcel on which the building is situated. And
the applicant is requesting instead of four stories for that to be applicable, they want it to be three stories. uh apartments, not townhomes. Um and then section eight of five point six to allow parcels under single ownership. Like the multifamily site or the s uh service ready site to retain responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep of common areas. And then section four oh two point five point D, uh this section of the code requires there to be a one thousand foot distance between a school, place, or worship. Or part for the sale of alcohol. And
so here's the staff analysis. Um For section 522.9.p2 tends to provide flexibility for multifamily units, um multifamily apartments, should I say, uh calculating park space based on the building footprint rather than the number of units. Uh the developer will at minimum provide 5% of the acreage uh as per the code and will program the park to accommodate social gathering and passive open space. Uh section eight oh five point six Parcels under single ownership, such as an apartment complex, may act as a responsible
entity for the maintenance and upkeep of common areas instead of a CDD or HOA. And then Section 402.5.d, it's a mixed-use development with walkable features and compact development. So they would need some flexibility in the distance for alcohol sales. The applicant would still need to obtain an administrative use permit for the sale of alcohol. Per four of two point five point B.
And so there were two added conditions from the Planning Commission. The first was an increased buffer on the northernmost parcel, the Bayes parcel. Uh this is gonna be a type two connected city buffer with an eight-foot decorative mason wall instead of a six like the code uh points out. And then two is we're prohibiting motorized boat access to the local lakes for residents living within the MPUD. This has no effect on uh current residents in the area, it is strictly for the MPUD residents. And so this is coming a recommendation with
approval with conditions. Yeah. Any questions for
MarianoChair
staff?
Yeah. Thank you.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Commissioner Weightman Clark Hobby Hobby and Hobby again. Uh If we can get in my presentation. I was just thinking as staff was presenting this it's I have been sworn. And I'll be sworn at, I'm sure. Uh we can go to the next slide. But commissioners, before I get going, this this uh presentation and the project reminded me of the A-Team, which I used to be a big fan of in the eighties, and the the Colonel Bull
the Colonel on there like to say at the end, I love it when a plan comes together. This project uh had a previous iteration about two, two and a half years ago. And I'll get more into the specifics of it at the time. But the larger part of the site that we're talking about was going to be primarily a multi-family and retail driven site. There are two different partials that you heard staff talking about. There's the Bayles site, which is owned by an affiliate of Falcone Development. And then there's
the Southerly site, the larger one that's owned by the Wildcat Groves Entity. And I represent and am very proud to say this. I'm working with Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital. and they are the contract purchasers of the Wildcat Grove site. When the MPUD started in its first iteration, again, there was a large retail and multifamily component that was supposed to be built on
the Wildcat site, and staff held out and basically told the applicants at the time that they were not happy with what the yield was for the site, and that staff wanted more and better. Mm. And we got lucky that in the intervening time the previous contract purchaser for Wildcat went away. And we got really lucky that All Children's Johns uh All Children's Hospital Johns Hopkins was looking around
in the area and found this site. And in my mind, this is going to be one of the most transformative things about this area of the county. and the connected city plan that we could have ever hoped for and I believe it'll it'll positively influence this area for an extensive amount of time. So as I mentioned to you before, there are two different partials involved in this MPUD. And I represent Wildcat Groves. Joel II and Christy
Barrera Height represent The Bayle site, and they'll speak in a few minutes about their portion of the site. But staff already showed you this slide and a couple of these. But again, the objectives for the two areas that we're dealing with, and I have highlighted here the South Innovation Zone. It always called for major health care and employment on the Wildcat site, and we more or less have. just gotten really lucky that it fell in our lap. and
the big benefit of it coming along is that staff previously determined that there was a large section of McKendry Road that needed to be built and neither developer could do it independently and by us now working together we're making McKendry happen and we're going to have a large service ready site acreage. uh location there. And again you saw the plan for McKendry earlier. Um staff already talked about the intent of Connected
City, which was to create an innovation zone. And the overarching theme of Connected City was that the board and the staff knew That the new 52 was going to be built and it was going to be framed on the south end by the Overpass Interchange. And it's just an incredibly important corridor and interchange to plan around. And so now, you know, when we look back at what the legislature told the board to do in 2015, and that
we at all costs wanted to enhance. The prospect for creation of jobs in this area, we're doing it with Pasco Town Center, and we're doing it with this project, and we're also doing what Connected City said, which is we're supposed to bring people together in higher density in proximity to where the jobs are. And we're following all of the planning principles that were laid out. You've seen this. this table before and again there's a large
amount of what is called multifamily which actually includes apartments, townhouses, and duplexes and this table. Look
Starkey
at the TND column.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Right.
Starkey
Zero zero zero zero zero.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Yeah, so if somebody does it, they don't pay anything, right? Is that what it's saying?
Starkey
I don't know.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Yeah.
Starkey
Well let's get on it then.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Okay. Well,
Starkey
yeah.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Okay, go back a slide.
In any event, l just trying to summarize, I wanted to give the board a little bit more historical information about this because I know some of the neighbors are concerned about the growth and what the county's objectives are in this area. Just remember this site was never part of one of the four identified rural areas. Though there are people living out there that know there's no question they live in what is a rural feeling area. This was not one of the areas that was supposed to be protected and kept
as rural, never was. Wasn't identified in 2006 on the new comp plan for that purpose. As I mentioned in the previous uh uh item on the development agreement, we're going to be building the major road.
Um but I I did want the board to also understand because of the timing involved with the MPUD and where we found the project when uh all children came to the site. We're having to make the entitlements we work need to work for the hospital work on the traffic study that was previously done. And we can't exceed the entitlements that were studied in that in the previous traffic study without updating it
and having new conditions that can be imposed on us. And we know that. We've accepted those conditions. There's no mystery there. We've told staff that, agreed with that staff about that from the get-go. Now uh One uh or two last things before Christy may want to speak a little bit about things, but there's been expen extensive discussion with our neighbors, including the closest neighbor to the Bayles site, and I just want the board to know
that Joel, Christy, and I are committed to continue to work with them after today. To solve what are really the open issues that have to do with things like setbacks in that area. We've already agreed to an eight-foot wall, the Bayes folks have, which is really unprecedented in the county. So we feel like we've already put a really good foot forward, but we'll continue the conversations with them. And if there's a way to get on the same page with them in the next
15-20 days privately we will do that, but I can't continue this item because we're dealing with contractual timelines that could literally mean that the hospital would not be built. So I need to proceed today. Now the last thing I wanted to say is we did have a planning report from Clearview Land Design and Hike Design, and I'm gonna asking them to give that to the clerk and enter it into the record simply to demonstrate that we are
meeting the comprehensive plan objectives for Connected City and dealing with issues like compatibility. Christy, do you wanna Yeah you are.
OakleyVice Chair
Didn't need an emotion for the paperwork.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
If you could yeah if you could receive and filed. Yeah, I'll look received
OakleyVice Chair
and filed.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Second.
MarianoChair
All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Christy Barrera with Pite Design, I have been sworn. Um I think Gavin and Clark did a great job about explaining connected city in the two zones that these projects are in. Again, Wildcat is in the South Innovation Zone, which was supposed to be given priority as a development zone because it's at the intersection of Overpass and McCabe. And then the Bayes property is just north of that, which is the very beginning of the business core zone.
And in the business core, the idea was to have target and industry, high-intensity uses, as well as high density residential to support the employees who would be working at those facilities. So we feel like this is a great mixed-use project at a very key intersection in Pasco County. I know you're just reviewing the couple of pages that Clearview and Height put together, but if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.
MarianoChair
Mr. Mr. Weightman.
Weightman
I always have questions. Thank you. Now explain last time we talked about last meeting we talked about this Commissioner Starkey brought up the good point of the variety of multi-family product that's supposed to be laid out in Connecticut. I'm hoping. that due to the unique nature of the business that's coming in here that will start to see the diversity that can be of what the multifamily product that's out there Can can we speak to that a little bit and then also too, I know
It maybe my my mind's a little foggy on the the green space. The gr and the green space formula as compared to the the parking and how that all works its way out into how it's supposed to be that way we're not eroding away you know the field goods of this.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So the Bayles property is proposing five hundred and fifty residential units. There'll be a combination of town homes and apartments on that property. And that is again the northern edge of this MPUD rezoning, slightly offset of the future alignment of McKendry Road. And just to reiterate The Bayles property is just residential. In Connected City, there's the service ready site area which is required. All of that is down at the closer
to the intersection of McKendry and Overpass because that's where the most traffic will be generated, the most trips and walkability at that intersection, closer to the interchange of 75. So all the non residentials to the south, the residentials farther south or farther north. your question about green space. The Parks Department has looked at this project as well as others. Connected City has a slightly different neighborhood park space than
the rest of Pasco County. So in Connected City, if you do multifamily apartments, um you can ha and that are four stories or higher. then 5% of that footprint needs to be allocated for neighborhood park space. What we're asking today is to modify that to include apartments that are three stories or higher. In other places in Pasco County that apartments are requested. For many years the
Parks Department has agreed that The land development code is a little bit outdated and mostly focuses on single-family detached homes to have one acre of neighborhood park space for a hundred residential units. If you were to do that for an apartment site, it would eat up a much larger percentage of that apartment property as neighborhood park space. That the Parks Department has done and the Connected City does is
to ha allow for smaller size neighborhood parks, and especially in this area where you have the higher density intensity, looking for squares and plazas and different types of gathering spaces. I think that's the most important thing is they still want to have the playgrounds and the uh areas large enough to have a pick up game of soccer, but they also want to have those gathering spaces that are closer to the non residential uses. So the one variation
that we're requesting is for what's already allowed in Connected City for apartments only, but instead of four story apartments, we would also be able to do that for three story apartments or higher. Does that answer your question about
Weightman
So what so since we're going three three levels
The outdoor the outdoor green space. I'm still it still wasn't clear as to what what that amenity will be for those residents living in there. So they're gonna come in, I just don't wanna be I mean just parking lot, parking lot, parking lot, right? So the connected part of the connected city piece I'm trying to understand.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Right. So um in this apartment complex they're gonna have a clubhouse, they're gonna have a um playground, they're gonna have all of the typical uh gathering spaces, park spaces that you would see in a typical apartment complex. So they're still gonna have all of those. The other great thing is this project is on uh two lakes. So the the views of the lakes, the use of the lakes is something that will be unique to this project as well.
And this has been approved in multiple zonings in Connected City and similar approval in other apartment zonings in other places in Pasco County previously.
Starkey
Uh
MarianoChair
Commissioner Starkey.
Starkey
Well just because we messed up other places doesn't mean we should mess up here. Um, in my opinion. Um however, this one is a little different because of the late. So um
But you know, I think we need to look at that. Um, and I have a question for you on the town homes. Are they rent or owned? around or I'm not sure if we know I know we
Unidentified speakerVoice C
it doesn't matter which a land use decision. Right.
Starkey
I know we can't distinguish that. But no one's building condos anymore. I d I don't know if the market's dead for condos or something, but where where are the doctors gonna live? If and You know they're I I um maybe maybe it's just that we're not seeing the other stuff, but all all we see are the apart are the for rent stuff for the apartments. I I don't I hope I hope that somewhere in this community are the homes for are
are homes where people who, you know, have a higher are looking for something other than rental or entry level. I hope someone's building that.
Joel
Mr. Two. Mr. Chairman Mariano behalf of the Bills parcel, Joel II, Palm Harbor, Land Use Consultant. And to get to that point, I think, and we fall into this trap frequently, we can't just look at the connected city as a microcosm that is one individual parcel that's one part of this project. The housing stock for Connected City is the entirety of Connected City. And you, in fact, already have
so much single family detached in Connected City that we consumed 100% of the entitlements. We couldn't build a single family detached even if we wanted to, unless you see fit to modify that going forward, as we've discussed. So I think the answer is the more fluid process. Professionals are going to buy a million-dollar home in Maratha or something in Epperson. So there is housing stock. We're simply trying to provide the other component because we're so close to the live work environment.
Uh the short answer is those town homes have to be platted as individual units. So they're available for fee simple sale and even if originally they're rented they very easily can be converted and sold. So you're going to have a fee simple product. on the townhouse component. So you are, at least on this one, you're getting somewhat of a variety that you're not getting on some of the others. But I think it that it this is so close to that interstate interchange, you think about that. Would you
buy a million dollar home? that you can throw a rock and hit the overpass interchange from your backyard. Maybe ask
Starkey
Doctor Patel that
Joel
well
Starkey
Yeah.
Joel
If you'll pay us a million dollars, we'll put you one there on the lake. I've got a contract in in my pocket. But I mean in all fairness, given the physical proximity, so that's one issue is given the physical proximity. The other issue here is although it looks like the Bells parcel is The tail on the dog? The problem is, we are a fifty-fifty partner. With the hospital in the construction of this multi million dollar road segment. and utilities. We
only have five hundred units. You do that math on how much our share of that is going to be per unit. We simply can't afford to help build that road in those utilities if we don't have this density on bells. And finally, it it is what your plan called for. Your plan did not specify You know, fee simple single family product on this side.
Starkey
I I'm not against the density. I'm against the product. I I I I think you're hearing us frustrated at the product mix.
Joel
I I understand.
Starkey
You could have marital mixed use, you could have brownstones, you could have garden homes, there's so many more kinds of homes that we're not seeing almost rental apartments.
Joel
But with respect, Commissioner, the yield you would get from that product on this parcel would not allow you to fund 10% of that road segment. And then you wouldn't have the employment use because we are effectively subsidizing that employment use on the other parcel by agreeing to pay for the process. Are you are
Starkey
you putting any any housing above like like Live Works? Are you doing any Live Works
Joel
or
Starkey
anything in your employment center?
Joel
What what do you call Live Work?
Starkey
Offices below? Housing.
Joel
No, we're not we don't have it we don't have any we don't have a non residential entitlement for a parcel. The other parcel has those entitlements and they may well build that adjacent to the medical office. But if but that's that's the hospital parcel. They also have residential units and they have mixed use and they have retail and they have office and they have health care. But ours is just that northern piece. So I I think I I I think you have to look at it holistically. not only the entire project, is
it bringing a benefit to the table? Because like Clark said, without this approval today, given their contract deadlines, this still likely is dead. And we go we've already gone back To go three times. My client started this almost three years ago. They've already owned their parcel over a year. And they've been sitting here waiting for the right user to get traction on the other site. So I mean I think we brought a very good plan
to you. I think it's exactly what you asked for to support this $65 million investment that the county's made in that interchange. And you know, we've we've really done all we can do. And that's that's the last thing I'm gonna say in the sit down is this issue about the buffering, the northern neighbor. That goalpost keeps getting moved and every time they request something and my client agrees it gets moved again. We will agree to what we agreed to at Planning Commission, which is way beyond what your
code requires, and that's that eight-foot wall and that type two buffer. Now
Starkey
we haven't heard from that person.
Joel
Right. In my view, it's a site plan issue and we're willing to keep working on it. But what we're prepared to do is what we did. and Planning Commission.
MarianoChair
Thank you.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Are there any other questions that I can answer?
MarianoChair
Um I'll just bring up one point that we I think. I think I read in the paper. Commissioner Weightman, you made mention of it about uh how there are no more single family homes available in connected cities, which I think is a huge issue. Uh as we talked earlier, if I could, let me finish. Um and I think what we need to do is really take a look at that. I think it's time for a workshop and probably quickly. One thing I feel if you have less density then you have less need for more infrastructure. So there can be a balance that can work. And
I think from everything we're seeing, it's probably a good time to go take a look at that uh coming up. It's not gonna affect what what happens right here, right now, but it is something I think it's w worthy of looking at that is that is gonna be as you for down the road.
Leonard Road
I think
Weightman
there's a date there.
Starkey
Commissioner O you know what
Weightman
I think there's a date. Didn't we have a date for that?
Starkey
Yeah we're gonna we're gonna you know we we only see it little pieces so it would be wonderful if we had a look at what's going on. 'Cause we see a little piece here, a little piece there. Like you know, there may be nice big homes in Connected City. I don't remember. It's been a long time. Um all I remember are are these kind of projects so I would like to get a idea of what's the big pictures. I know, you know, originally there was a tight village court and green space around
it, open space. We we let them we we got rid of that green open space very little that tells that identifies one village to another. Then we got rid of the T and D requirements, which is, you know, the rear loaded um product with the walkable streets that makes a c you know, like Old Northeast or Hyde Park. W we we that was in this and we got rid of it. So or it was in D O P H I may be mixing them up. I sometimes I
mix them up. But I'm looking here and it says Live Works. Vertical mixed use, those are things that you see in a in a walkable community. But so so we got rid of that stuff in DOPA, so we changed that. A lot. Um, I have no idea what we've done here in the big picture, so I'd love to see it. These guys might know it, but
Unidentified speakerVoice B
there's a graphic We know the only there's a graphic that Clearview created that I'm trying to get up uh for everyone to see. But you have approved quite a bit in Connected City. Epperson and Murata were the first two, and those were almost two-thirds of the entirety of Connected City, and they took up most of Single family detached, which was always the plan because they're the farthest east in Connected City. So they were the North Innovation Zone and the South Innovation Zone. Closer to the interstate was where the business core was supposed
to be. We wanted the you know technology and the target industry to be right off of You know, the new brand new interchange that was just updated at 52, and then the new interchange that was constructed at Overpass. So to have you know the bookends of those interchanges was really important to get industry in those locations. Pasco Town Center came in a year ago with their MPUD rezoning and they have four million square feet of industrial going in. You guys were at the groundbreaking a couple weeks ago for that.
That it's now called Double Branch. Now, the Wildcat Bales MPUD is the southern bookend. We're gonna have a great hospital there, and we're gonna have residential in Pasco Town Center and in the Bales Wildcat property to support all of that non-residential use. So it's a little bit hard to see, but the blue, everything that's outlined in blue, are approved projects. So like it Said um Epperson is on the east side. That's you know the blue area, which is the South Innovation
Zone, and also some of the community hub, which is yellow. Marauders just north of that in the green. Those are the two big ones. Pasco Town Center is right along 75. Bayes Wildcat is outlined in yellow. And then you have smaller ones, the Ellis M Pud, the April M PUD. Um so quite a bit has already been approved and is coming before you. So there there's a lot of good work that has gone on in this area. Is that
Starkey
the ROV network? Or those are th those are just No,
Unidentified speakerVoice B
those are the boundaries
Starkey
of
Unidentified speakerVoice B
the zonings you've been.
Starkey
Yeah. Okay.
MarianoChair
So as as a matter of matter of fact, later on today in the same area we're gonna have one from Clark that he's got that he's gonna be looking for The density that you like. possibly a roundabout could be put in there. And the gentleman wants to go to where he have the option to go to single family homes. So I don't know what it's going to take for us to be able to make that change, but as you mentioned before, Commissioner Starkey, And I think the b the board board has talked about as well. When you have nice quality homes for people to live in, for the executives that come down here, maybe they're st coming down to look at their locating
their business. If you have the high-end homes, people are going to want to come here, locate their companies here. And as much as we're accommodating for the jobs we're creating, I think we've got to put another focus on let's go look at what's going to bring us the high quality executive. type home that's gonna want to live in these areas. And they will live, but they're not gonna live jam-packed. They're gonna want to have space. So I think it's time we actually start looking at this plan as well as V O P H and say, how do we look for these things to come into play?
OakleyVice Chair
We have we
MarianoChair
have some of those coming in the future. We do
Unidentified speaker
have
MarianoChair
I'm just saying well the thing that scares me is just as we said with this, you're all built out of single family. So let's go find out what we can do to maybe look at these model vacations coming
Starkey
Right. Remember though,
MarianoChair
Mr. Starkey.
Starkey
Remember, that's where we're we're getting the money to pay for the roads. So you t you lower the density, you get less you can't build those roads.
MarianoChair
If you have less people, less density
Starkey
you don't need
MarianoChair
you don't need as much density. It it get the lowers the dime.
Starkey
I think that ship's already stuck.
MarianoChair
No, we'll see. Okay. All right, any other questions? Okay. Any else? Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Yeah. You can you can demonstrate it one way or another.
MarianoChair
Jane, you've asked for 14 minutes. We've given you that as you're representing a client and other people.
Jane Graham
How many people?
MarianoChair
Well I don't know if there's any other people, but
Jane Graham
Um can I have the panel point?
MarianoChair
Just for the record that's which time I gave the applicant extra time too to bounce out.
OakleyVice Chair
And um before you begin, if you could state your name and address for the record and whether or not you've been sworn. Yes, of course.
Jane Graham
Good afternoon. My name is Jane Graham. I am of Sunshine City Law, 737 Main Street, Safety Harbor. I represent Tanya Riddlesworth and Patrick Gant and I have been sworn. Um Tanya Riddlesworth and Patrick Gant are a married couple who own the homestead property directly north of the Bayles parcel at [address removed]. Um Bottom line, there are significant flaws in front of you today and we're requesting that you do either deny or
continue this hearing until they're cured. Number one is there's a serious flaw in the traffic study that um you don't have the information in front of you relating to the types of uses and there is a condition that tries to account for it, but my client has hired a traffic engineer and he assessed and it it does not appear that the numbers are like for like. So I just number one, that's a major problem. There are also unsupported park a acreage variances and inconsistencies
in in the comprehensive plan. My clients have tried to dialogue with um wildcat and bales over the last year and a half and they actually have had some productive conversations and I I do want to really thank uh Clark Hobby and Christy Barrero. Um at some point we came up short and we felt like concerns of compatibility and transition were not addressed.
To make sure that you're being considerate, but you have to be considerate of impacts to existing property owners. And the comprehensive plan is still binding. And compatibility, all of these sections up here are also still binding. Um things that you should look at especially are compatibility. Compatibility through appropriate design, looking at increased setbacks, limited building heights, and innovative site design. This is exactly what my client is asking for. Likewise, in the comprehensive plan connected
cities section, it also speaks to the need for compatibility in form and character with surrounding neighborhoods or in the immediate context. As was already spoken. about and I'll just touch on this quickly this is part of the the Bayles parcel is part of the business core of the connected city and it's actually one of the first if not the first business core parcels that you're looking at so you really want to make sure you're getting the most out of this and it's complying. The other item as well about it is that The business core
has open space options, which are parks and plazas and farms. This is the the view from my client's property. As you can see, there's a lake. And actually, these two lakes on this parcel, or or by the the parcels, are really one of two sets of lakes throughout the whole area. So it's really uh in the connected city, so it's really special and unusual to come. With this, it's important to use the natural open space systems to the best way. So this is
my client, her property is five-acre homestead property, AR residential flume. They have chickens, goats, and horses. This is a close-up of it. You can see the lake, the the canal. To look at this of the surrounding zoning, it's AR and they are ER. The purposes are as ER is a transitional area between agriculture and suburban. AR is to accommodate individuals of
rural state living. These are the setbacks. And again, we want to your comprehensive plan requires that there's ensured a harmonious transition between existing development and new development. So this is binding on you. So because of that we will sp and and this is the future land use map, because of that we'll speak to what we're asking for. Something that I do want to touch on is There's a contradiction because the future mind-use map for my
client's parcel in Bayles is actually residential one, which is really supposed to be for single family homes, but it's also in the business core connected city, which doesn't allow single family homes. And so because of that tension, the thought is if you're going to have residential, what is the closest to that? And so that's why my client and others have really looked at duplexes or one story row houses that are closer to what the intention of the residential
one idea is. Um now looking at the setbacks, this is the connected city opt-in versus boundaries and if you look around the perimeter and and I don't have everything here but What's interesting is that I couldn't find any example of a current property owner. Who has Um a five-acre parcel and there was a ten foot setback between them and a townhome. It just I
didn't see it anywhere. I saw examples where there was a community development district in between it, where there is a road in between these types of parcels here. That area is 140 feet. That's by Maratha as an example. Here's another one where there's a road. Um this is Sand Hill Flats also that's not a s uh that that's not a homestead property, so it's slightly different. Um and this is King Lake also not a homestead where you have it brushing up. But as far as
a actual property owner, we don't have an e I I couldn't find an example and I I challenge your staff to show an example of something similar of a homestead property, residential one future land use, AR zoning with acreage of five or more, that's had a ten foot setback next to a multifamily in connected city. I couldn't find it. Every other example was like a commu community development district, LLC or diocese. Um Really quickly, the res the request for park space
variation is also a significant reduction. Uh Commissioner Weightman had some questions about that. And if you actually look at the numbers where this is all in front of you and I'll give you copies, for four or more stories, it's five percent of the acreage for park space. Less than that, that less than four stories. The code says that it for a half acre, um From twenty six to ninety nine dwelling units. Uh plus one hundredth of an acre for each additional dwelling unit. Over ninety nine. So if you do
that in comparison for if you do the variance they get two acres of park space. If you don't do the variance you have five point one acres of park space. So you're actually giving away three acres of park space with no support and and no no good reason given there. Um there are also critical flaws in the transportation analysis. I am going to submit into the record a letter from a 27 year veteran engine traffic engineer Drew Rourke. Who
has looked at the traffic analysis and also your condition and the fact that there's a discrepancy of what land uses were evaluated and then what is actually being asked for. The hospital isn't being asked for, and um this conflicts because you need to look at the description of land use, trip generation, and internal capture passerby.
the I the what what you will hear from staff is that well there's a land use equivalency matrix but that doesn't work if there's a difference ultimately in numbers and here our um Drew Rourke said that it was five hundred and fifty different uh five hundred and fifty trips that were a deficit um this is the the map the uh the diagram program that he did. So finally, what should be done here? Well, we think the best thing you can do
is actually ask for continuance and make sure that the traffic study is done right. We want you to deny the park acreage variance as totally unjustified. We'd also ask for the following conditions to be added: setback of 100 feet plus duplexes starting at 100-foot setback. Homes no closer than 200. And again, this goes to the ideas of compatibility and transitions. Transitions are really important that needs to be looked at. Also, landscaping
left. And for the boat, the idea that we we looked at, and we think that we might have gotten there with the applicant is that if non-motorized boats are checked out. Per use and allow it on the lakes within the footprint of the MPD, and then boaters sign a form agreeing to avoid the canals on private property. So that's ultimately where we are right now. My client wishes that there were more time to sit down and hash this out
and come to a settlement. We have appreciated the opportunity to speak with them, but we're not there yet. And also the traffic study has a Serious fatal flaw that we think exposes you to an appeal. So with that, I'd like you to hear from uh Tanya Riddlesworth. And unfortunately, I actually have to leave, but I will call in. Um so I will be on the phone.
MarianoChair
Be before you go, before Tanya speaks, I just want to go over some because we did meet with Tanya, et cetera, and we we talked about setbacks, what was required, et cetera. Then we talked about uh from I think it was AR. was fifty and ER was a hundred feet. Right. But that was from like the front of the property, not the side of the property, from what talking to Mr. Hobby showed us. Right. Those are
Jane Graham
the the rear setbacks versus the side setbacks are R 25.
MarianoChair
Right, so it should be so it should be twenty-five. So everything we talked about, I just want to be open with you as we s as we talk. My impression was if that was the case, we should be looking at that. But it seems to me following the land development code At the twenty-five foot they're actually meeting what the code says. Do you agree with that?
Jane Graham
Well, I think the counter to that is if you um we we don't know the actual orientation of the the townhomes or or the the um whatever is going to be there and on top of that it's not just the you know the pure language about setbacks, it's actually looking at transitions and um where you have the idea of having a a five acre parcel of land abbutting up next to a a parcel with five hundred and fifty dwelling units, there needs
to be further consideration of what kind of transition is there. And so it's i I I understand what you're saying as as far as what lives in the land use development code, but on top of that you have an extra layer of the compatibility and transitions in the comprehensive plan.
MarianoChair
Right. And as you heard earlier, we we we've we've given out all the single family homes that we can improve in the area at this point. We hopefully change that. But I th I thought if you know if they weren't putting apartments right back to her, let's say her property, they were putting town homes or some two story I thought that was kind of reasonable. I'm I'm just wondering what you guys really think as you as you look at that.
Jane Graham
Yeah, I mean I I think my client's position is that if there is a a bigger setback and then stagger it from duplexes or however you want to call it, maybe some other kind of innovative home, and then from there have townhomes, she has no problem with it. The other thing that's really important is that she is not requesting any kind of reduction. of density. So I'm not standing up here and saying take away five hundred and fifty, you know, even fifty units. We're just saying we think that needs to be reconfigured in such a way that that um
there is a good transition. And also taking into account the fact that you have this lake that has, you know, the need for a trail or setback and it's kind of a distinctive feature on the property.
MarianoChair
All right thank you.
OakleyVice Chair
I have a a question for him in regards to who signed up. I want to make sure I've got it correctly. Because um you said that you're here representing Tanya Riddlesworth and Patrick Grant Gantt, is that correct? They're they they're signed up on here, so since you're representing them I'm not going to call them because one identifies him as on WebEx, so I just want to make sure.
Jane Graham
I think Anna uh Tanya will go first. Oh
OakleyVice Chair
okay, so you you were talking for that's
MarianoChair
combined
OakleyVice Chair
with the altogether?
Starkey
Yeah, so I and I have fifteen minutes.
MarianoChair
Fourteen.
Starkey
Fourteen minutes. Right. So they have the Now I understand thank you.
Jane Graham
Four minutes. Five minutes. Four minutes. Would it be possible to have maybe like an extra minute just for them?
MarianoChair
Let's see how it goes.
Jane Graham
Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Tanya Riddlesworth
Good afternoon. Tanya Riddlesworth, [address removed] and I've been sworn. Thank you. Um so I I do want to mention that um we do we don't have a problem with growth as Clark mentioned. Um the citizens here aren't here to say we don't want you to grow. We're here to say let's do it responsibly and let's think about all of this together and let's think about the citizens that are here. I also want to mention that you can bing build single family homes within the Connected City. You just don't have to opt in, which many people
have actually done already. There's been several other neighborhoods that haven't opted into Connected City and they've just chosen to build single-family homes. Another thing I want to mention is that there are million-dollar homes actually right around where that hospital would go. One of them is arguably mine and JC's and several others. So these rural homes are very important to keep for, you know, possible future residences of these doctors. So we do need to make sure that we retain that
nature for us. Um And I also want to point out that there was an email from Gavin that I received today and I I don't have it for you guys to look at here, but I thought it was interesting because it's an email that has uh or a document that has a recommended residential density determination for connected city. And in there, it specifically says that the criteria for determining the minimum maximum density should consider existing neighborhoods, and it says need to gentle
transition. And that is exactly what we're seeing here today. Okay, we're not asking for them to lower the density. We're asking them for to consider us as their neighbors in a respectful way, which Which we think providing a hundred foot buffer and then staggering the homes from one story to two story to then three or four or whatever it may be at the south end. Um So I kind of went off script of what I was gonna say, but I think that although that was uh Jermaine to point out
there But I just want to point out that my husband and I bought this property 10 years ago. We fell in love with the rural nature of it. We want to try to keep it that way as much as possible. We understand that there is growth. and we don't intend to necessarily stop it, we just want it to be respectful to our property. As Jane pointed out, there was another example where there's a 140 foot setback. Right around Marahda. If you look around Maraudha, it's all 10 foot everywhere. Except for this rural area, which is the only example
currently in Connected City where you have rural next to high density. And there you have a 140-foot setback for them. And potentially they might put a trail through that or some other green space. So since this developer is asking for a reduction in green space, this Would be a good example of where you can say, hey, no reduction in green space, take that three acres, put it right there, make a nice trail for your residents, and really put some better thought into this. So that's our hundred-foot setback that we're
asking for, and I I really don't think that's unreasonable considering that 140-foot setback on the other property. Um and I mentioned the one-story buildings next to us, staggering. And I do want to point out that I found out about this development um about a year and a half ago when my neighbors told me that they sold to a developer. At that time I started making plenty of phone calls, emails. I got in touch finally with Hype Design and Christy Barrero and I have an email from April 16th, 2022, a year and a
half ago, where I clearly stated my concerns to her about the privacy wall, restricting access to my canal, restricting the building sizes along my property to one story and other concerns. These were ignored, never addressed. We're here today because we decided that we were being ignored, we needed to hire a lawyer. And that's where we are today, standing in front of you, asking you to please um Delay this um rezoning so that we can actually
work with them and address these concerns that we have. My husband's gonna be on next and he'll be talking more about um Sorry, he'll be talking more about uh the park space and other issues. Sorry.
Jane Graham
I just I I have the documents to enter into the record that I can do.
MarianoChair
The The motion motion received and file. Motion received and file. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. And your husband's on the line now?
Tanya Riddlesworth
Yeah, he is on the line. Um I really hope that you can give him a little bit extra time because um I think it'd be important and information for you to hear.
MarianoChair
How much dann mehr gemacht?
Tanya Riddlesworth
How much time is left
OakleyVice Chair
on the clock?
Tanya Riddlesworth
Yeah, twenty sevenths.
OakleyVice Chair
And he is not on on WebEx.
Tanya Riddlesworth
He's not on WebEx.
OakleyVice Chair
Uh it wasn't working for him, so he's on the phone call. Okay. Is it a four oh seven area code? Yes. Okay, then that would be him.
MarianoChair
Uh in Land I probably took up a minute or two of questioning. Do you want to give them three minutes?
OakleyVice Chair
Chairman Mariano.
MarianoChair
In light of my questioning I kinda like threw him off a little bit, but I wanted to clarify I thought it was important for the board to hear. Do you want to give him three minutes? It's up to the board.
OakleyVice Chair
The world.
MarianoChair
Okay. All right, three minutes and this will end it. Thank you.
OakleyVice Chair
All right, Mr. Ganster, you're you should you should be able to um speak and we'll be should be able to heal you.
Mr. Gantt, we cannot hear you. See if you're muted.
We still are unable to hear you?
Yeah.
Just check your mute.
Sworn
Sorry, got it. Right.
OakleyVice Chair
There you
Sworn
go.
OakleyVice Chair
Yes, if you could um state your your name and address for the record and then also if you could let us know if you have been sworn. Sworn in.
Sworn
Yes. Patrick uh okay. Patrick Gantz, [address removed]. I have not been sworn in.
OakleyVice Chair
All right. Um, do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, so help you God.
Sworn
Yes I do.
OakleyVice Chair
All right, you may proceed. Thank you.
Sworn
Thank you. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I I appreciate the opportunity to speak. Again, I'm Patrick Gantt, the spouse of Sonya Reynoldsworth, and again we live in property north of the Bayles property. I'd first like to cite Florida statute one sixty three dot three two four six one E four. Promote economic diversity and growth while encouraging the retention of rural character where rural areas exist. In discussions we have had with Christy Barrera
prior to the planning commissioning meeting, Hyde Design was intending on pushing a pile of dirt to separate our properties. I was astonished about the lack of consideration High Design had on our property a property that took up the entire north side of their development. My wife Tanya again, as she mentioned, uh contacted Christy over a year and a half ago And no word with font. Whatever the excuse, Hype Design has fallen short of its responsibility to properly plan how its property affects
the people residing over the north side of its development. And it's because of their lack of oversight that me and Tanya are here to ge uh today. We are rule and we exist. Next I look to cite Florida Statute one six three dot three two four four four four four six. One e five, provide and maintain perbi uh public, urban and rural open space and recreational opportunities. This part this part space variance Jane had previously discussed will again
reduce approximately three acres of park space. This variance was submitted because High Design wants the property to be considered of having to have four story apartments, reducing the required park space. They've submitted this variance even though they have not submitted to building above three story apartments. And myself as a licensed general contractor and professional engineer, I know that if you build above three stories, your building requirements shift from Florida building code residential to Florida building code building. Florida Building
Code Building is much stricter regulations on materials construction practices and means of egress. In my opinion, incurring the additional costs associated with adhering to the Florida Building Code building is why Hype Design is not committing to building above three stories. Yet they still apply for a variance to reduce the park space requirement. This is not a betterment to our community. It's a moneymaker for them in my opinion. And lastly I'd like to discuss that setback issue we're having with height design.
Jane and Tanya had had discussions with height design w w and they would not budge on a ten foot setback initially. Um but now we're hearing that possible they might be uh offering twenty five feet. But this is not an adequate transition between our a agricultural property and this dense development. Again and looking at other examples that uh Tanya and Jane had discussed, we've seen examples of a hundred and forty foot setbacks.
OakleyVice Chair
Okay. Um that was the three minute timer.
MarianoChair
Okay, so public comment will continue and do we have a list of who signed up for this item?
OakleyVice Chair
Yes, I do. Um Michael Polterek.
He was here.
Let me go to um Jim, I didn't get your last name when you're up.
Starkey
Um Did you say you have people signed up for extra time?
MarianoChair
Uh uh, not for the subject.
Starkey
Not for the subject.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
I wish I did.
Starkey
Uh
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Jim Marineri, [address removed]. Uh I was sworn. Uh just to address a couple of of comments and the questions and uh in the discussion you had, uh there and and I believe uh the uh Tanya had said there are five million dollar plus homes that are directly adjacent to this this property um on Elam Road. Um many of those folks have uh had owned
the land well predating the connected city plan. They also have built homes since the connected city plan came into effect. So there should be some consideration even though I don't have a million dollar home, there should be some consideration on the transition. We are Lakeside Estates and it's kind of cramped
roads there that come off Elam. Um they uh many longtime residents. We've been there, we've accepted what the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners with the uh the plans for the zoning. This is kind of abrupt. uh that property. Uh Commissioner Mariano, you were uh saying about the where are the doctors going to live and we don't have the
single family homes. The property that we're talking about was estate residential. That's what we're switching from, the state residential to can to connected city and PUD. So we are losing what was planned, even though it's along the interstate, uh it's it's it's now being transferred. Um the uh entry-level homes is what we should be concerned about as connected. Commissioner
Starkey had said that. We don't have to really worry too much about where the doctors are going to live, but we do have to know where the office workers and the physician assistants and anybody else that supports these businesses. There are millions of square feet of industrial that has been approved north of here and also on campus. Canton Road going up. So we are now losing the entitlements. We
have uh zero left for the single family homes. It was estimated to take t 2040 to Fulfill that? We accomplished it in less than seven years. At this point, at this point, we have 19,000 approximately, because we don't know how many have been approved, but the only building that is left besides the the industrial office
and retail is 19,000 multifamily homes. Where are they going to go? And we have properties, like someone else had had said, we have properties where owners are not gonna opt into connected cities. And how do do you all account for that for the future? Because if we approve these onesie twosies, uh not I I shouldn't say that, but if we approve these these things in a vacuum, then we're dealt dealing
with some issues coming down the road.
MarianoChair
Thank you.
OakleyVice Chair
And that is all I have signed up and um no one is left on Webix.
MarianoChair
Anyone else want to speak to the item?
If there's anyone else, please come forward.
Unidentified speakerVoice E
Right, okay.
MarianoChair
All right, so this will be the last person for public comment. Good?
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Oh, Joel and stuff.
MarianoChair
We'll let them rebut back up.
OakleyVice Chair
Again, stick your name and address and
Unidentified speakerVoice F
whether or not you can swap it. Uh Juan Contreras uh [address removed], uh [address removed]. Um
OakleyVice Chair
you were sworn because I was sworn. Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice F
Um on the lake, um I'm wondering if we can put a cap
people are gonna be allowed to come in with their kayaks or John boats, you know, not motorized. Um there are small lakes, so when you're looking at thirteen hundred apartments, I don't want to be out there on Fourth of July and have, you know, fifty people on their kayaks and then there's, you know, ten residents that live there with their jet skis or boats and somebody's gonna end up getting hurt. So I don't know if there's a way where we can put a cap on how many people can be on there. at one time
from those communities that they're looking to build. And the second thing is um if we could piggyback off what um Tanya was saying on her property or the property adjacent to her, if whatever's built on the Wildcats, the apartment complex, if it's approved, that they also are built to look like the other ones that are being built across the lake so that we don't have four story build uh apartment complex on our side next to our house. And
then you'll have let's say two story duplexes on the other side of the lake. So I would like hopefully that they can be uniform and they look since they are being, you know, uh applied for together so that they look the same. That's a possibility. And the other thing is since there's a helicopter gonna be coming in there. and we do live out there and we do live on a lake and my kids get on the lake and we have drones, are we going to not be allowed to use
our drones any longer on our property?
'Cause we've been there already and we use 'em. And so I don't know if that's fair to us that have been there already because now FAA is gonna be putting regulations on us with our drones. And what's the distance around the hospital that we will no longer be able to have a drone.
MarianoChair
Thank you.
Okay, back to the applicant.
Is no one on WebEx for public comment?
OakleyVice Chair
No one left on WebEx. We've concluded that.
Joel
Mr. Chairman, I'm going to rebut for the Bell Sparcel because most of these comments, not all, but most are directed at the Bells parcel and then Mr. Hobby will close for the uh the overall project. So to summarize the objector's position On our property, we should have a hundred-foot setback to duplex units and a 200-foot setback to townhomes. when we are clearly in the business core of the Connected City plan. And
there is a chart in the Connected City plan that specifically dictates the buffer widths in the Business Corps District. And what it says is if we have multifamily adjacent to their single family It requires a type two buffer. We not only have agreed to the type two buffer, but we have voluntarily agreed to add an eight foot wall. On top of that. Not six foot, but eight foot wall. So we've already have in the conditions more than the code requires.
So you can you can speculate or wish or want a hundred foot or two hundred foot setback, but the county's adopted plan. Initially Authorized by the legislature, adopted by the county that won national and state awards specifically says we have to put a type two buffer specifically If it's multifamily against single family, and if we end up putting our town homes adjacent to that property, which is most likely. We
don't even have to put the type two buffer. What is the type two buffer? It is a Ten foot blame scale.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Christy Barrero. So the type two buffer is a minimum of ten feet and it includes some sort of screening that's six feet high. The screening can be a hedge, a fence, or a masonary wall. We have agreed to an eight foot wall. which is much more restrictive. I I believe uh Miss Riddlesworth husband when he was saying we were gonna push dirt was maybe talking about the hedge or the berm that was allowed. We
agreed to a fence and then we agreed to a wall and then we agreed to an eight-foot wall. So this is above the requirement in the Connecticut City Land Development Code for the landscape buffer adjacent to residential, attached or detached.
Joel
And again, even if we put townhomes there, which is the most likely result when we get into site planning with staff, we still are committed because our condition, we volunteered in the conditions, we still will put the eight-foot wall, even if it's an adjacent town hall product. So the request, and again, this is a continual moving target, so we have the right to do exactly what the Connected City Plan states. And it's very clear on this. It's not it's not negotiable.
It says exactly what our requirement is. We're meeting it and exceeding it with the eight-foot wall. My next point is
The residents. who are on the lake want to be able to have jet skis and motor boats and drums. And yet my client Isn't supposed to have any of that. My client for the record owns. well into the lake. My client owns more of that lake than any of these residents own. My client has just as much legal right in the state of Florida under state law to use that lake. Notwithstanding that, to try to be a good neighbor, and again to meet the moving goalposts,
we have agreed to limit the use of that lake to known non motorized Water vessels only. And and that's in our conditions and we're prepared to abide that that so we're going beyond. Again. The neighbor responds to the canal as, and I quote, my canal. That is factually inaccurate. My client owns half of that canal, and she owns half of that canal. So that is not her canal, it's my canal. And we have the same
right to use that that she has. This is what you're getting here. You're getting you're getting this me, me, me thing. And and they know they're in the business core. They were there when it was approved. They knew it was getting approved. And if some people built million dollar homes in there, as the last speaker said, after The Connected City was approved. Well then Lord knows they knew it was the business core and that they were doing so at their own risk.
I would question If you get a chance, because they testified under oath, the representations in the letter and at the podium that this is their homestead. Our team has researched and found short-term rental advertisements for this property. Don't know if it's registered with the county as a short term rental. But it's being advertised that way and has been for quite some time. So I don't know if the objector actually lives in that home, if it's truly
their homestead. But I think that's something if they're going to represent that that's the case to try to curry favor. Someone needs to answer that question under oath and under penalty of perjury. Because either the ad is a mistake Yeah. They've testified falsely. To the commission.
The attorney's argument that their res one flu, current res one flu, is inconsistent with Connected City Business Corps. is another Clear mistake. If you recall, Connecticut City is an overlay. And what you told everyone and what your plan says is if you have pre-existing, in this case res one, You didn't take it away from 'em. They have it, they can live under it, and they can build under it. So It's
only if they elect to invoke the additional density of the overlay and pull that business core designation down, then they can develop the same as we are. So there is no legal inconsistency. They have their existing Res One flu unless and until they elect to pull down the business core entitlements. We're electing to pull those down, which your plan allows, and we're specifically agreeing to abide by the letter of the law. as to what that business core requirement
is in terms of setback. Now with that said and then I'm gonna let Clark Clubs We've said all along that we have obviously tried to negotiate a resolution. We still have site plans to go through. We'll have to nail down exactly what product is going. How tall that product will be, what the setback will be with staff. We're happy to continue this dialogue with the neighbor. And try obviously it's to our advantage if ultimately we can reach some accommodation that they
will accept, not challenge a site plan or something else. And we'll continue to work on that. But at the zoning stage we are today, we are absolutely entitled to this approval based on the Connected City plan, and we respectfully urge you. to approve it as those conditions are stated now coming out of Planning Commission and allow us the opportunity to work with staff and the neighbor going forward in the hopes of resolving something. If we can't resolve something that works for them and us, we're going to build per the code
and if they want to fight about it, then there'll be a fight about it. That that's just the way it has to work. But we will do our best And we assure you we'll do our best to try to resolve that because we want the hospital to come. So we're we're motivated to help make this happen.
Starkey
Um question on the picture that was given to us, and I did just look up the listing online uh for Airbnb, um there are a lot of trees along there's there's a big buffer there now of these trees. Is that still standing or are those trees on your property or their property.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yes, that's a wetland on the property and that will remain. Well
Starkey
there's a huge now I'm talking about the ones between your property and the
Unidentified speakerVoice B
closer to the larger part of the lake, uh along the canal. Is that what you're talking about? Okay, so
Starkey
there's
Unidentified speakerVoice B
there's a
Starkey
big buffer there.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So that's a wetland that would not have the landscape buffer. They're seven hundred and twenty-five feet approximately from existing McHindry Road to where that wetland starts and that's where our ten foot buffer with the eight foot wall will be.
Starkey
I was saying this. There
Unidentified speakerVoice B
is quite a bit of tree vegetation along the canal going out to the lake as well.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Huh. Mr. Chairman M I'll be Clark Hubby again, I'll be very brief. Uh one of the neighbors raised the issue about the drones and whether it could flick with the helicopter traffic. I would Remind the neighbors, I stated this at the Planning Commission, that uh one of the family members of Wildcat Groves owns a piece of property next door to this at abuts the Wildcat Grove site, and it has a conditional use permit already
for helicopter uh uses and it has existed I believe since 1980 and there was a helicopter service that flew out of the city. site for many, many years uh actively, I think until last year, year before. And so if the drone traffic may already be prohibited by the conditional use permit. I don't know. I'm not trying to shut them down, but I think that's just kind of a red herring. But the bigger thing I want to say to the board is
OakleyVice Chair
Mr Spader.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Yeah, Mr. Spada, his deceased brother. Right. Mark's brother and Andy.
Starkey
Mark Spada's
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Mark's brother Andy, yes, he was a helicopter pilot in Vietnam and then he flew a commercial operation there and did a lot of work for Swift Mud and other governmental agencies. But I just wanted to bring it down to a more simple thing. This is a day we ought to be celebrating. We're at a monumental place. We all know that we need hospitals in this county. We've got a major uh growth uh spurt that's ongoing in the county. And there are general hospitals that serve the general population, but this is a regional facility that
we expect may draw people from as far as 100-150 miles away. And we're very, very lucky to have it not only wanting to come to Pasco County, but in the exact location that we need it. So in my mind, this is a day to be celebrated and the issue. We're discussing today, we've already put a great foot forward with our neighbors, but these are we'll look back years from now, and the only thing we're gonna remember is that this board voted to approve this project for the
hospital and the other uses that go with it, and you'll be proud of that for the rest of your life.
Starkey
And fr and frankly, um the gentleman and and the woman with the Airbnb also mentioned that their homes were worth a million dollars more than looking at it's a beautiful home. I actually think your hospital is gonna greatly increase the property values of these large lot landowners in this area.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Right.
Starkey
For some I mean
Unidentified speakerVoice A
I I appreciate and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
MarianoChair
One question. The gentleman from the neighborhood, uh Lakeside Estate, the other was worried about too many kayaks being put out there. And I think you've done over and above not to have motorized out there. Uh is there a number you'd be comfortable limiting it to so it doesn't
Unidentified speakerVoice A
like it. I I don't think we can do that under Florida law, Commissioner. We own out into the lake. I uh that The only thing I would say, just remember, if people are fixating on the amount of multi-family in the project as a whole, the hospital is going to be converting a great number of their multifamily units that were in the original application for the hospital. So we're not going to have 700 units and stuff like that. If we have any multifamily on our site, it's much more likely going to be in the nature of like a power
that would be connected to the hospital and Our client, the hospital, doesn't believe that it should be treated any worse than any other landowner in the state. And for that reason, they don't want a limitation on the number of kayakers. And and just also, we went above and beyond the other lake condition that the board has imposed imposed on other lakefront properties in the county by completely prohibiting non-motorized Boats.
So we feel like we've already gone beyond the call of duty here. So Okay.
Starkey
I would move approval of the project and
OakleyVice Chair
I'll I'll second that
MarianoChair
with with a delay discussion to the motion to make it first.
Starkey
Okay.
MarianoChair
Okay to the second.
OakleyVice Chair
Um The fact of the hospital, the children's hospital coming there is great for Pasco County and the citizens of Pasco County. We all Baycare was supposed to go on the same site in time past, but they chose to go on Dell maybe right across from Advent Help. And then we had Orlando Health buyout. Part of medical. And they're moving to 56th Street and and in construction. Um There's a lot of hospitals coming to this area and a benefactor of all these
hospitals coming here. They're going to be competing against each other to give the best service to our citizens, and our citizens are the benefactor of all that service they're going to get and better health care for everybody. So it's it's a great spot and a great All Children's Hospital is a great hospital for our children.
MarianoChair
And and one thing that was brought to my attention as well is because it is in the connected city, they're actually paying mobility fees, if it was not in connected cities separate from it, they wouldn't. So they're actually helping quite a bit in the infrastructure as well. I agree. Any further discussion? transportation? Okay, power for everything's closed, I'm sorry. All right.
All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.
Going to number P one oh three.
OakleyVice Chair
Item P 103 was published in the Tampa Times on October 4, 2023 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.