Zoning Amendment (Consent) – Kiddie Campus University, Inc. – Change in Zoning from an AR-1 Agricultural-Residential District to a PO-1 Professional Office District– South Central Pasco County – on the Southwest Corner of the Intersection of State Road 54 and Meadowbrook Drive – Containing Approximately 1.67 Acres (PC: 7/22/21, 1:30 p.m.; NPR, BCC: 8/10/21, 1:30 p.m.; DC; Continued from PC: 4/22/21, 1:30 p.m.; NPR Hybrid Virtual Meeting, BCC: 5/18/21, 1:30 p.m.; PC: 02/18/21, 1:30 p.m. NPR Hybrid Virtual Meeting, PC: 3/4/21, 1:30 p.m.; DC Hybrid Virtual Meeting, PC: 4/1/21, 1:30 p.m.; DC Hybrid Virtual Meeting, and BCC 3/23/21, 1:30 p.m.; NPR Hybrid Virtual Meeting)

1:14:03Liam Devine, Planning and Development, Adendum Item PC eight. Um PDD 21-7516 in the name of Kitty Campus University Inc. It is a zoning amendment from AR1, Agricultural Residential District, to PO1 Professional Office District. The subject site is located in the southwest corner of the intersection of State Road 54 and Meadowbrook Drive.

1:14:30The subject site is currently undeveloped and contains approximately 1.67 acres. The owner/slash applicant proposed to develop the site in conformance with the PO1 professional office district standards for development. On April 20th, 2021, the Board of County Commissioners denied a comprehensive plan amendment from Res 3, residential three dwelling units per acre, to commercial for the subject site. A companion rezoning application to C two General Commercial District had been filed.

1:15:02On April 22nd, 2021, and May 18th, 2021, the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners continued the rezoning to a date uncertain.

1:15:12On june seventh, twenty twenty one, the application the applicant amended the rezoning application from C two General Commercial commercial district to PO one professional office district. The subject site was reviewed by Long Range Planning Division and found to meet the location criteria for comprehensive plan policy flu 1.6.5, which provides criteria to permit the location of office development within residential flues. This is a look at the surrounding

1:15:42zoning. To the north is AR-1 and an MPUD, Sapphire Hills M Pud. To the east, south and west is AR-1. You'll also note on that one that there is already existing PO1 zoning to the west.

1:15:59And then next slide. And then this is a look at the future land use. To the north is Res 3 and EC, and to the east, south, and west is Res 3.

1:16:13This is a look from the access. As stated before, there's an MPUD, Zephyr Village MPUD, that is to the northeast of it. There's already professional offices located Caddy Corner to the subject site. And this is coming with a recommendation of approval.

1:16:30Okay. Well any uh Questions for Will.

1:16:39No?

1:16:43Barbara?

1:16:51Good afternoon again. Good to see you all. So you'll recall that we brought this matter to you all sitting as the LPA for a comp plan change a few months back. Um after we left the planning commission with a recommendation of approval of the of a commercial land use for ultimately what the application was for a C two zoning we went to the Board of County Commissioners. A lot of opposition to commercial um development and specifically C two. um that the client was seeking

1:17:21at that time. In reaction to the board not wanting to ha see commercial uses at that location. We have amended our application for office. We heard over and over and over in both public hearing that office would be compatible, commercial would not. I think there was a recognition that this property is with is on State Road fifty four at a inters signalized intersection and that it was not appropriate for residential use. And so we took

1:17:51the rezoning, we went for we applied, excuse me, for the least intense rezoning district. We didn't go for PO two, we went for PO one. As you would call the neighbor said, What's nice about office is It's occupied during the day. It's not occupied at night, generally speaking, or on the weekends. So we have um followed the direction um and and brought came in with PO1. It's actually the best result. If my client doesn't

1:18:21isn't able to move forward, you'll have somebody else in here wanting to do C1, PO2, and at least this brings to closure the use and office use at this location. Because it's not going to be residential. And it's also consistent with the office use that was approved by the board to the west a couple lots down. Uh we have our team here and uh if there's any specific questions, but let's hear what the neighbors have to say. Okay. Thank you.

1:18:49Thank you, Margaret.

1:18:53So is there anybody here to speak in opposition?

1:19:00Mr. Chair, I do also want to mention that there is a gentleman that signed up on WebEx as well to speak on this item.

1:19:07Okay. Let's take the people that are in present first.

1:19:20Hello, my name is Jennifer Robertson. I reside at one seven two four five Riverstone Drive. Lutz, Florida, three three, five, five, eight. Um I don't object to it only because I know something will go there. Um, I do wanna point out that The second lot is well within our neighborhood. So I do want to recommend that um We have an input on

1:19:51the design of what goes in there and the um landscaping. There is a ditch that abuts that property. We've talked over and over and over about the um flooding from that. And the uh The last storm just shows that there is a problem. I realize that that problem is coming from Um Ballantry. They do need to reconfigure the boxes

1:20:21and slow down the water. Because it's not safe. If someone's walking from like leaving our neighborhood to Go to the sidewalk or whatever. they will get washed off the road if if we're within that s you know, floodwater situation. because the current is hard enough to push a small car. So um I don't know what anyone can do to um try and

1:20:51slow down that prop the water that's coming from Ballantre. 'Cause it is definitely coming from Ballantry. Um I know it's not his problem. but also the water coming from State Road 54 will come down the side of his property. So he's gonna need to mitigate that water to where it slows it down. Um maybe he can get the um DOT or whatever to try and contain their own water, which

1:21:22is the proper way to do it. Um But there is a neighbor um in the cul-de-sac uh that you see kind of coming up the side of his property. that his garage was flooded. So we do need to make sure that the water is mitigated on his property and we do want something that looks nice for our neighborhood since it's within our neighborhood.

1:21:49Okay. Those those items that you're talking about, they'll be addressed at site plan approval.

1:21:54Right.

1:21:54I just

1:21:55wanted to make sure

1:21:56it

1:21:56goes on record

1:21:57that we want that. I can assure you that it it will be required for them to mitigate that. that uh water runoff they won't be able to create additional runoff onto your property.

1:22:07Okay.

1:22:08And uh So you can be you can be feel comfortable with that.

1:22:12Oh

1:22:12in terms of the other things you can Yeah, you can have some input at uh at site plan review.

1:22:17Okay, great. All right, thank you.

1:22:20Thank you. Any other questions? Nope. Okay.

1:22:32No one else?

1:22:35Online.

1:22:37Mr. Grant who's on WebEx.

1:22:39Oh okay. Barbara you want to hold on there? Yeah. Okay, uh Mr. Grant. Yes, thank you. My

1:22:48name is Douglas Grant at [address removed] in Luther, Florida. As you heard, the subject property is two separate lots.

1:22:56Mr. Grant, excuse me. Yes. Uh I don't know I doubt that you'd been sworn, have you? Have you been sworn?

1:23:05I was present during I yeah, I heard the initial swearing but I will be happy to swear again.

1:23:11Yeah, because I don't think I heard your voice.

1:23:15Okay, I was mooted at the time. So yes, please, let's let's do it. That doesn't help you before now mooded. Okay.

1:23:21Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you God?

1:23:26Yes, I do. All right, thank you very much. Go ahead.

1:23:31Okay. As you heard, the subject property is two separate lots. Both the lots are within Meadowbrook Estates. There's a northern lot at State Road 54 and a southern lot which is surrounded by agricultural residential properties with single family homes. I conditionally object to the proposed rezoning because the applicant includes the southern lot in their request for rezoning. Commercial use at the Southern Lot is an intrusion into

1:24:01the existing AR community. A county policy prohibits this condition. I refer to policy one point six point four that states Quote, New Neighborhood commercial uses shall not be located internally within existing family neighborhoods. The county includes offices in the definition of commercial use in the Comp Plan, and the southern lot is definitely internal to our neighborhood. Also, I'm concerned that commercial development on the southern

1:24:31lot will set a precedent to develop any lots in Meadowbrook estates that has the same offset from State Route 54. And regarding that precedent You don't need to look any further than the County's own pre application comments dated July first. where the county attempts to justify this rezoning by improperly citing an outdated, temporary and terminated special exemption that once applied to a space inside a neighboring home, as

1:25:02if that special exemption is comparable to this land rezoning. Also, commercial developer approached my neighbor, whose home is located two lots from State Road 54. Developers appear to be expecting rezoning deep into our neighborhood. And we're requesting that you honor this 1970s era community going forward. The county and developers have plenty of other land for commercial development, much larger than what we've done. point six acres that

1:25:32aren't among homes. Now I said earlier my objection is conditional. I might change my opinion if the southern lot is removed from the request or or rezoning or the developer voluntarily restricts the development as follows. Limit the layout so building structures are on the northern portion of the combined lots and use the southern portion for stormwater controls like a retention pond or detention pond. The architecture of a building Meshes with the residential community. There are more robust

1:26:02setbacks and buffers compared with the minimum setback and buffers allowed for the requested zoning. No special exemption for a daycare, and there is a ban on tenants that generate pollutants. And most importantly, we seek a mandate from the county that the landowner developer must coordinate development with a coalition of Meadowbrook Estates owners. Yeah. So the county and the developer and the homeowners can have assurances that every step of the development isn't combative. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it.

1:26:32Thank you.

1:26:34Okay. Barbara?

1:26:39Thank you again. So the policies that are cited are relating to commercial development. You heard commercial development, commercial development, commercial development. We are seeking low-intensity office. Um we will be a good neighbor. We've worked with the neighbors before. Um Ms. Honeywell and I were just discussing, you know, she did not get up here and object to continue to work together. Um we'd ask for your support on the PO1 zoning. Thank you.

1:27:04All right. Are there any questions for Barbara? That's why I Demeterry? No.

1:27:12Oh Terry, I'm sorry, I didn't see

1:27:14you. Uh just to follow up on some of the In order to understand the comprehensive plan, the policies in player here would be 165, not 164. Flu policy flu 165, not policy flu 164. Policy flu 165 is office. And so this would this would Uh a rezoning to the to the professional office zoning district would um follow the office policies of the comprehensive plan. Um Uh one thing to note that I'm not sure

1:27:44it has been noted previously is that the special exception that was approved Uh back in two thousand I forget the date. Two thousand eleven. Um

1:27:57Is it is an important consideration when you're when when I'm thinking about the the intrusion question, because in order to find the special except exception Uh in order to approve a special exception, you have to find it consistent with the comprehensive plan. The extent of this property is directly across the street to the extent where the previous special exception was approved. So it it's already been found in the past at least that there is uh a consistency with the comprehensive plan

1:28:27to have such a use. come into uh the neighborhood up to the uh The creek there.

1:28:34All right, Harry. Thanks for that clarification. That's good. That information. Okay. Um Any questions?

1:28:44Any uh I hear a motion. So moved. Have a motion to approve? I'll second it. We have a second. Any further discussion of the motion? All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye opposed, like sign. Okay, motion carries.

1:29:10Okay.

1:29:13Let's see. We're in eleven now.

1:29:19Just a moment, Mr. Chairman.

1:29:24It's PC eleven, it's item twelve.