PDE-25-0274

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. 97% of 92 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1. 1Jul 15, 2025
   Board of County CommissionersC14Consent agendaApproved

   Approved minutes

   Approved Staff’s recommendation with the 30 year change.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 12:40
   ▶ 12:402m1/2

   StarkeyChair

   12:40I am here. And now is the time for public comment. Citizens are given an opportunity to comment on any current or future agenda item coming before the board and on other business under the board's purview. Today's public comment will be handled as follows. First we will take public comment From those who are here in person, then we will take public comment from those who have pre-registered for a WebEx link and are currently on queue. We request that when you address the board, comments are not directed personally against a commissioner

   13:10or or team member, but rather directed at the issues. This provides mutual respect between the board members and the public. After stating your name and address for the clerk, a three-minute timer will be activated and a green light will be shown on the podium. After two minutes, a yellow light will indicate you have one minute left, and when your time is up, A red light will be displayed. Three beeps will sound and you should close your comments and WebEx participants will be disconnected

   13:40automatically when their time is up. Monsieur Clerk, do we have anyone signed up?

   StarkeyChair

   13:45We have no one signed up in advance.

   StarkeyChair

   13:48Okay, is anyone online?

   StarkeyChair

   13:49We have no one

   StarkeyChair

   13:50online. Is there anyone here in the room this morning that would have liked to address the public? Good morning.

   Nancy Hazelwood

   13:57Good morning. I've just got a question. Nancy Hazewood [address removed] you don't want

   StarkeyChair

   14:02to answer questions, but you can try.

   Nancy Hazelwood

   14:04Um I'm I'm would like to take something off the consent agenda and I was wondering if I was too late to do that. Can public pull off the

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   14:14consent.

   14:16Go ahead and make your comments. You can make your comment on the agenda item and maybe a board member would pull.

   Nancy Hazelwood

   14:21Okay, so my question is I'd like to hear it in totality for C thirteen. It's pulled. Um excuse me, for C fourteen. Um I'm not sure and then I just want to hear the whole thing and I'm sure it's probably fine but I'd like it gone over for the public.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   14:40It's already pulled by the public. It was pulled by Commissioner Weightman and Commissioner Oakley. Wow.

   ▶ 1:23:5819m2/2

   David Engel

   1:23:58just wanted to give the board a bit of history. In December of 2006, Pasco County entered into a stipulated settlement agreement designating this property as employment center, requiring corporate business park or target of primary industry or industrial uses, multifamily uses, support commercial office uses, including service stations, hotels, neighborhood scale markets, and restaurants. Subsequent to that, in 2022, the applicant submitted

   1:24:29an application for zoning for an MPUD, and at that time they requested 1.5 million square feet for distribution warehousing and 300 apartment units. At the uh early part of this year, uh the matter was brought in front of the Planning Commission and the application was amended. And then I'll just I'll pick it up from here. Uh the applicant is revising its uh original request to include one and a half million square feet of IL office.

   1:25:00100,000 square feet of uh retail uses supporting the business park. And one of the commissioners had requested during the course of action that the uh residential be platted uses, not uh Not rental type of uses, but for home ownership. The property is located uh again here on on Lake Iola Road. Uh we have a plan without any residential that we're proffering today. The frontage uh on Lake Iola,

   1:25:30that that pink area will be for small-scale flex in light industrial uses. We've identified that there are a lot of business people that live in the northeast part of the county that need access to a business park. In fact, uh one of the one of the residents who lives just north of this property uh was uh uh objected to the apartments, but we worked with them on the plan and they said as soon as the uh building's available they're gonna move their business in here. So we've been getting a lot of uptake. The yellow phase

   1:26:01two part of the property is uh for uh for some distribution uses. The property slopes down from the frontage on Lake Iola to the back. You can't see the back piece. And we're capping the amount of distribution to 500,000 square feet. So you will be achieving 1 million square feet of high employment generating light industrial.

   1:26:27There are probable costs associated with improving this property to get to it to a site ready position. That's roadway improvements, that's drainage, that's doing on site utilities. The probable cost for all in is eighteen point two million dollars, and we are proposing a fifteen million dollar economic incentive package. Twelve million dollars comes from ad valorem rebates, which is uh the If you recall, they pay their property taxes

   1:26:57and then a portion of those property taxes in the following year are delivered back in the form of a rebate. And we also are proposing $3 million of penny for PASCO because we need to get these improvements in and there won't be any tax generation until they start construction. Uh but it'll all be on the basis of reimbursement. They have to do the work, they have to show us the receipts, and then they get reimbursed for whatever the incentive requirements are. And we prioritize the infrastructure to make sure that

   1:27:27this is uh developed in an orderly fashion. First we'll be doing the Lake Iola road improvements, then bringing utility improvements within the property, then doing the internal roadways. Then mass grading for the phase one non-residential, that's the million square feet of light industrial. So it'll be pad ready, ready to go. There really it's a a ready site program. And lastly, the the the following areas if there's still sufficient funds is the rural scenic harder preservation

   1:27:58and property buffering, which is required anyway by the development uh and uh MPUD which we'll have in the afternoon, sidewalks and other required MPUD improvements. We are also proposing a 20-year moratorium for residential development on the property via the 2006 stipulated settlement agreement. There is a very significant incentive payment clawback if the developer opts to do residential in 20 years from

   1:28:28now. We believe that those clawbacks are significant enough to not allow for a residential project to pencil out. And the way we've configured the improvements and design the project, it's highly unlikely you'll ever see residential on this property. All economic incentives again are reimbursable grant items. Uh there are features associated with this cooperative economic development agreement. We have enhanced architectural standard requirements. We don't want to see cement ugly tilt ups

   1:28:58from the Lake Iola Sena corridor, so they'll be using brick facades and other treatments to make it look consistent with the rural History and heritage of the area. All scenic roadways have to be protected according to our scenic roadway plan ordinance and the surrounding properties have extensive bufferings, in particular the northern side. We have a type B 50-foot buffer and we are preserving existing hardwood trees in that buffer area. Uh the developer has agreed to cap commercial

   1:29:28support at 100,000 square feet and cap the distribution of 500,000 square feet so we have a pure 1 million square foot light industrial deliverable. The project, as far as the financial characteristics and component, over the 30-year period of this agreement, the general fund will net $40 million in tax revenue. Right now the property is fallow and ag, so we have no really tax revenue on the property. Once

   1:29:59full build-out has occurred, we'll have an annual Rose County product. Contribution of $78 million a year. Approximately 700 new full-time jobs will be generated at the site. The economic incentive is equivalent to a $10 million, a $10 square foot buy-down, which is consistent with what we've done with I-75 Gateway and Double Branch. And it is finally establishing an important employment generating area in the northeast

   1:30:29part of the county. And uh this Evans uh project, if the board will approve it today, will be phase one. Phase two, and we've already been having discussions with the public through Pasco 2050, is to create a specific employment center sub-area policy that will be unique to Northeast Rural and protect the character of the surrounding area. And we're we're working on that. And I've even asked uh Ms. Hazel Would to participate in helping us out create guidelines for this new employment

   1:30:59area. So on that I recommend approval of this item based on the conditions that I just stipulated in my presentation. Thank you.

   Oakley

   1:31:07Commissioner Oakley. I'm in full agreement of this project. As a matter of fact, this project has gone from what was presented early on to this program. Much better than what they were asked for before. This project is good for Pasco County and the citizen of Pasco. Can you imagine me in a business park having things that deal with new homes and homes in the area and you're right on the border of Hernando County where a lot of growth is happening

   1:31:38and also with Pasco County. I mean that's a win win for those people who put their business in here. They have a you know, the audience they're gonna have coming through their business is gonna be great. Uh one change I would like to make and what David uh repeated, if you go back one slide, I think it's on Slide before where it talks about the twenty year moratorium. I'd like to change that to thirty years and it'll be better. I I never believed that the Evans

   1:32:08family's gonna wait twenty twenty or thirty years to do a residential area on here on this property because they're gonna There's gonna be somebody out there right now that's looking to take care of this property and make it what it what we're wishing it to be. So I I'd like to make that motion to uh change that one item.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:28Well I'm trying to understand the reluctance to have people live near where they work. So Does wouldn't it depend on what? What that residential looks like So you're saying you you don't want any homes there for thirty years?

   Oakley

   1:32:44No.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:44So What if it's someone who wants to build a t twenty acre horse farm?

   Oakley

   1:32:51Well they're not gonna do it there.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:53Why? Because

   Oakley

   1:32:54because you're going to have a business park there. It's an employment center.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:56It's an employment

   Oakley

   1:32:57center.

   StarkeyChair

   1:32:58But if I looked at the map Well maybe the applicant's attorney wants to be good. There's no places in here that can be

   Oakley

   1:33:06No, I'm not gonna put any residential. If if uh Joel too comes up, I think he can uh give you security that the Evans family is good with this.

   David Engel

   1:33:15Madam Chair, I I think there's one relevant thing to bring up that I should have done before. In two thousand twenty four the Board of adopted in the uh revision to the employment center. Originally it was struck that it would be twenty or forty percent of it would be multifamily housing. The board eliminated that twenty percent threshold down to zero because they wanted to maximize employment on these properties. Now the surrounding area obviously has residential, massive residential in Orlando County, which is just a spit away from this.

   Oakley

   1:33:44But across the street from if you got rural homes across the street from this product.

   StarkeyChair

   1:33:50I I can't where's the map of the can you bring up the other map? That showed there was a big square there. Okay, so what are we looking at here?

   1:34:00Okay, so what is is phase two is warehouse?

   David Engel

   1:34:04That will distribution and warehouse.

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:06So where were you where were you going to put residential even if there was allowance

   David Engel

   1:34:10to change the plan? Well that's why we ch we developed a plan like this to to avoid having residential on this property.

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:17Well you said in twenty years they could put residential, but

   David Engel

   1:34:19they are allowed, but it would be uh virtually almost impossible to do so. The lot platform

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:29Oh I know. I'm

   David Engel

   1:34:30not sure. So we we've tried to design it to avoid having residential development here.

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:34Um so what is Is that also their property where it says number two?

   David Engel

   1:34:40Phase two. Yes it is.

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:41And what is that?

   David Engel

   1:34:42And it well that's where the distribution is and if they were

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:44everything.

   1:34:47The entrance number two. Oh. Down the bottom left. What is that? Well that's it. That's

   David Engel

   1:34:52a that's a service road that goes in through the site that service that creates frontage on those those other things.

   StarkeyChair

   1:34:59Is that also part of the Evans property, that white piece at the bottom it's not? That L? So it's not a M L, it's just this rectangle.

   David Engel

   1:35:06It's just a rectangle

   StarkeyChair

   1:35:06of

   David Engel

   1:35:06eighty

   StarkeyChair

   1:35:07eight. Um I I have another question in Jack, do you have some questions? Go ahead and I'll come back to my

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:35:13So I'd say this project is a lot better than when it first came to me.

   1:35:24almost completely eliminat the possibility of residential. Um and and I'm glad you're going from twenty to thirty making that suggestion. I I would even suggest that if we're gonna do all this money 'cause when I first discussed this project, there was wasn't talk about any incentives So seeing it take this extra step forward, David, I think it's good that you're doing it to ensure that it weakens any chance for it, but I would really like to just see even the residential part wiped out. I don't know if the Why are

   StarkeyChair

   1:35:51why are we leaving residential on there?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:35:54Well and again I wanna I'll I'll I'll listen to Joe when he comes up, but I I wanna just see if they because it's gonna be so hard, especially you're not gonna be able to do it in phase two. Phase one, if you're getting all that stuff built out, you're not gonna be able to really do it and again for thirty years, if he's willing to do that, maybe you'll just say we'll just even take it out.

   StarkeyChair

   1:36:11And and I have another question for you too. Are those contour lines on phase two? Does that mean that's a hill?

   David Engel

   1:36:17No, it's a it's a it's

   Joel

   1:36:19damn. Joel two. Palm Harbor, Florida, Land Use Development Consultant for Evans Properties Inc., the property owner and applicant. Okay. I'll answer the second question first. Yeah, the topo drops from west to east. So the high land is that grade at Lake Iola on the west side, and then it drops dramatically to the east. That's why on this plan the larger warehouse distribution

   1:36:49site would be on the lower portion of the property, and in fact it is a s it is a severe enough drop that you literally will not even see. y you'll be over the top of the buildings. Um so they'll be tr uh substantially shielded from Blackon Road. Uh Evans does not own the property south of us that goes down to Blanton Road. Evans does not own, but all of that land is part of your EC future land use area. So all of that ultimately

   1:37:19will come in, presumably, if this approval occurs and Evans can kickstart this employment center, presumably those other properties will be coming in under the EC designation to seek similar approvals to map this thing out. Uh getting back to the first issue, um Since it's been a three year process literally uh for us to get to this point uh since we applied Um it is important to note, as Mr. Ingel pointed out, that

   1:37:50Evans, at least in our opinion, has an absolutely vested legal right to build rental apartments based upon the 2006. court settlement reached with the county. They are willing, as part of this negotiated resolution to essentially not build the residential for the life of these agreements. So we have agreed Um We have agreed and do not object. to Mister Commissioner

   1:38:20Oakley's proposed modification that would extend that for the full 30 year term. of the development agreement and the MPD. Now when the MPD comes up this afternoon if you approve the the economic incentive agreement we would need to modify the MPD to match the third-year restriction. as a practical matter that is a permanent restriction unless this board changed its mind because the zoning will expire

   1:38:50in 30 years. And the DA will expire. So they literally at that point would not have zoning and would have to come back thirty years from now in front of whatever board is sitting here. for to do anything else. Um the reason it's kind of a moot point as a practical matter is the three million Penny Grant. from the county will not be nearly enough to do the phase one because we have to do all of Lake Iowa Road. the utilities and the

   1:39:20mass grading. So Evans andor its industrial partner they're going to be spending at least three million more out of the box to get phase one ready. А ви осуа дедлай. on doing that or we don't get the three million. Um common sense tells you that once you start the project as a business bark and spend all that money. And particularly if you have to pay that money back. If you ever go to residential that it essentially serves that purpose. But

   1:39:51I think because we have the existing legal rights to build apartments, this is a solution that frankly made sense for both parties. We think it makes sense for Evans and the county. And I think it gives you with a thirty year deal, the short answer is the county then controls any change. We would no longer have the right, we wouldn't have zoning to do it. So We can make the further concession, and we've made a lot of concessions the last three years. We

   1:40:21can make the further concession to go from twenty to thirty years to get approval, provided that both the economic incentive agreement and the zoning ultimately are approved today with that change and that change only. Uh we're just not in a position to renegotiate. the rest of the deal. So we will accept that thirty year um Restraint? And would appreciate your support.

   StarkeyChair

   1:40:50Oh go ahead, Jack.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:40:52Commissioner Oakley, I commend you for working with them. I mean to take this this was one of the projects from twenty plus years ago we made this an employment center area and we knew it was gonna be difficult because of the topographical issues that are out there but we still wanted to provide that. So I appreciate Joel, the Evans family for coming back forward and work with Commissioner Oakley and probably Commissioner Weightman along the way as well to to bring this forward. It's a lot more than I expected. But I think it's a lot more beneficial. I think it ensures pretty much that we're gonna get jobs created out there like we wanted to. So thank you for

   Oakley

   1:41:22that. It's a win it's a win win for the Evans family, it's a win win for the Pasco County. 'Cause this is gonna be a good project and It'll service a lot of citizens, not just here, but even to the north.

   StarkeyChair

   1:41:35So so my question um is on the improvements to Lake Iola, which is an arterial road, that it will have the multi-use path on one of the sides? Yes, ma'am.

   David Engel

   1:41:47The cross section is um is stipulated within the land development code for the scene and collector roads and whatever that cross section is uh will be produced on this property. Okay. Or along this property.

   StarkeyChair

   1:42:00Because we have cyclists who are out there and Better to get 'em on a multi use path than to have them stay on the road.

   David Engel

   1:42:09Well please ans ask that question when we have the MPUD this afternoon and Mr. Vermilion will give you uh uh an overview of what that cross section is.

   StarkeyChair

   1:42:18Okay. All right, um I'll entertain a motion.

   David Engel

   1:42:22Move approval.

   StarkeyChair

   1:42:23Second. All in favor? With the thirty

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:42:25year

   StarkeyChair

   1:42:26with the with the thirty year. With a thirty year, yes. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Thank you very much. No, y'all worked hard on that one. Uh C twenty nine.