Zoning Amendment (Consent) – Remington MPUD Master Planned Unit Development – Sandhill Flats LLC – A Rezoning Request from an A-C Agricultural Zoning District to an MPUD Master Planned Unit Development District to Allow the Development of a Maximum of 127 Single-family Detached Residential Units on Approximately 44.2 Acres.
What the county recorded
Staff recommendation
Approval with Conditions
No disposition in the minutes
The approved minutes do not say what became of this item. That is a gap in the record, not a decision. It is the normal state for 24% of items. Most of those are regular business and board reports that the minutes do not dispose of in writing. This archive never infers an outcome from the fact that someone called a vote.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Planning Commission, Sep 22, 2022
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Planning Commission, Sep 22, 2022
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
This case, across meetings
PDD-22-7611 in full →Heard once. PDD-22-7611 appears on no other agenda in the archive.
- Sep 22, 2022PlanningPC7▶No disposition in the minutesthis item
What was said
Machine transcription of 21m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 48% of 98 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Okay, so we're gonna go ahead and go on to PC seven. Is that right, David? You okay with that?
Yeah you Just go to back to the ones that you pulled.
Okay. So P C seven.
Good afternoon, Tammy Snyder, Planning and Development.
Tammy, before you start, does Planning Commission want a presentation from staff on it or do you just want to hear the I public comment on it.
I'm fine with
the public comment. I'm fine with just the public comment. Sure.
Okay, cool. Done. Thanks
Tammy. Good job.
Okay.
Okay.
Michael Pultoric. [address removed].
And you were sworn, right, Michael? Yes sir. Yeah.
I'll try to lean in.
Oh perfect.
Even better. Perfect. Thank you. All right. So this is in regards to the Remington project. Um just to be clear, same as the last time I spoke with you gentlemen, I don't have an issue with houses. I don't have an issue with development. Putting houses on lakes, that's a little bit of an issue, but I'm not gonna go there. As you can see, this is an area of King Lake. It's a beautiful lake in Wesley Chapel. Pasco has two King Lakes. This is the one out towards Dade City. Since I believe it
was two months ago with the Gen Partners uh project that was up here, I tried to shed light on the fact that a hundred and six thousand square feet of commercial and five hundred and twenty-seven homes was gonna shed about one point seven million square feet of water during the storm season. We got with Swift Mud. The north outflow and the south outflow apparently is just fine. They have no issues with it. That leaves us one outflow for the entire lake. The only part of this lake that's been
developed so far is Epperson Ranch on the east side is the Biscayne Bay Holmes. This is the west side of the lake. This for the last three months has been a continuous river through private property, to come out of King Lake. Because the lake's about six and a half feet higher. It probably should be. This goes into a culvert, so it's a designed watershed. The culvert goes underneath this la this part of the road right here. This is right on Kenton Road
and you can see from the washout after the water receded that this is one of four places where we had Water over the roads and washing out the roads from this single lake because the stormwater issue hasn't been resolved. We have stormwater issues there. Sounds like around most of the county the development is causing stormwater issues. Let's not become like South Tampa here. This is one of the four places where the roads were washed out. That's where the culvert comes out. all
of that water, the continuous river for the last three months. That's the field that the culvert dumps into. If you look in the middle of the picture, It's actually where the townhouses are going to
What did we decide on? Two hundred and fifty seven townhouses?
That's where all the water goes to. This is where the field Drains into It's McKendry Road on the west side of that field. There's no place for the water to go. This was a river. It took four wheel drive vehicles to get through here. Every place I'm showing you brought in truckloads of limestone, because the water has to go somewhere. This is Kenton Road. Right in front of the prior project that we spoke about, this was a river for about ten days straight. This
is what it looks like today at Elam and Keton. With all the water holding, everything is Ready to Overflow and explode. There's no place for the water to go to. This has been like this for two months. If you look all the way to the right there's a hill. That's the stormwater management Facility. This water could be redirected and reused. It could be sent right back out. We could use it for irrigation. It could be used for
whatever reasons we come up with. But the problem is right now there is no stormwater management plan and that water is not being diverted anywhere. I have eight acres behind my home, between my home and the actual Kenton Lake proper.
Yeah, sir. We're just gonna have to get you to wrap it up because your
time's up. So two thirds of that has been holding water and underwater for the last three weeks. That's not fair. I have I have cows out there. I have a herd of black Angus out there. The water level is six and a half feet too high. And This is the rain graph from the last ten years that I also showed at the last meeting
I was at.
I asked him a question. Sure.
And so are you objecting to this project on the basis that it will Exacerbate flooding.
This is another Edge of the Lake. That the water has to shed somewhere. With gravity, the water's gonna shed right down into the lake like the east side of the lake.
I'd love to come on out. I'd love to show you what we're talking about. Do the Only place all sides of this the square mile has to drain into after it gets to the retention ponds is into King Lake. Historically there was three outflows. Swift Mud has given up on two of them for development.
I just wanted to understand that you're objecting to this project not just making a statement to us about the drainage in the area in general.
I object to this project only because it's going to add to the stormwater issue. I understand. If we could create a solution for the stormwater, put houses all the way around it. I don't care. I'm not opposed to the houses. But you can't flood out the existing residents because we're going to continue to develop all the way around this lake. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, Clark, Hobby, Hobby, and Hobby PA. 1090 Brest Street, Tampa, Florida, Bens Warren. I'll be brief. The subject site that we have is on the north side of King Lake. He's talking about the west side of King Lake, and he's probably focusing on an area that It's between 0.75 and a mile and a half away from our site. And I'm told by our project engineer that we actually discharge to the west, not into the lake in the area where
he's concerned about. Regardless, these are stormwater management issues that we deal with at the time of site plan approval. We are directly adjacent to the Epperson Connected City MPUD, which I believe has about 3,000 units. This is 120 units on 40 acres. We do not even abut the lake. Subject site. There's another piece of property with a fishing club that's between us and the lake. So your engineer
here? Yes. Can he come up and show us on a map just So I understand.
I mean I have to get them to pull the aerial up in the map series.
So Mr. Moody, you you you can have whatever questions you want, but just frame of reference, so that's Tyndall Road that's running along the north side there. Yes. And so you can see our our parcels don't run on down into the lake. There's an intervening parcel. But he can answer any questions you may have on drainage.
Yeah, okay. Well bring 'em up. Yeah.
Good afternoon. Uh Trent Stevenson, uh level up consulting to five oh five East Jackson, Tampa, Florida.
Okay. So Where does storm what where's the natural direction of outfall for this property?
So it is to the west and you can see the uh Yes, right where you are. That's gonna drain into that wetland system. And then where does that wetland system outfall? And then it will migrate its way down to the south. To the south into King Lake.
So ultimately the
stormwater gets to
the
but again we're we're going to uh meet meet the state standards as well as the county standards for discharge.
I I understand. Swift mud and the county standards and you'll design to is is King Lake a closed basin or an open basin system? It's open basin? Would you say it's a constricted outfall?
Um
Thus far, I mean we're not in full d design uh at this time, but we haven't had any indication that it's a constricted outfall.
Okay, and the gentleman's testimony before was I think he was trying to make the claim that there was a constricted outfall. Two to one. Okay.
All right.
Again, Mr. Chairman, just these are issues that have to be dealt with. You all are two of you are PEs on here, you get it. We have to deal with this during the site plan approval process. And these are things that Trent and his firm will have to go through at that time. I will say we spoke with the the man who spoke after the other hearing on the other project, and there were discussions I know with Swift Mud, and I'm not sure whether there have been discussions between he and County. But we encouraged him to do so because there could be uh an issue downstream on the
other side of King Lake. That is in the county right away or before the county's uh reclaim facility down there? I don't know, but they were off site of both of these sites, so
Yeah, I mean especially this time of year maintenance maintenance on stormwater systems is a big is a big deal around the county. Um I mean obviously we're getting a lot of rain so they they tend to show themselves a little more frequently now, but I mean a lot of times th there are maintenance things that can be done. I I think uh
But I encourage no to g I encourage him to get with county staff and leaving here I'll I'll direct him to get with Gary Williver and the guys who deal with stormwater and we can see if we can get them talking together and see if there's an issue.
Thank you, Clark.
I don't know if this is David, you're I'm gonna need your help here. The gentleman that came up and spoke, Michael? What's his expertise in regard to stormwater?
Uh just first person to kill. Okay,
all right, fair enough.
Historical
Well it looked like he did some homework, so I was impressed.
Okay. Sorry, you can't really talk from the podium. Yeah. But if he's answered your question then. Okay. Uh
is there anybody else here to speak on this item? Any other discussion from up here?
I'd like to make a motion to approve, but I'd like to add a condition. And I don't want Clark don't panic because I'm not going to condition what I want you to do. Yeah. as the project moves into the PDP construction plan, site plan process. That You meet with Swift Mud, you make an evaluation of the outfall for this lake. And if it's deemed to be a restrictive outfall That's
right. We do More mitigation than just the twenty-five year, twenty-four hour storm and I would be talking about the two-year, ten year, twenty-five year storms. events to make sure that we're not overwhelming the outfall there.
I think I can s what I I I don't know that I can agree to that. What I can say is that we will evaluate we will evaluate all those things during you know during the site plan approval process.
No, no, no.
System and I don't know that that's what the code or the Swift MUD regs actually require. That's what I'm saying. We will evaluate it. I have no problem saying we'll evaluate it and consider all those things, but I'm not, I don't know enough to say that a condition is acceptable, saying I will design it to that if it's not
basketball. you to design it. I'm asking you to study the outfall and determine whether it is a restricted outfall in those storm events. If it's not, then you will adhere to the standard criteria. And if it is then you'll do something to mitigate the impact on the outfall.
My only
Thank you.
My My uh again, John, I I'm trying to make a finer point here. I don't know that if it's a restricted outfall triggers the applicant or developer to design something or meet additional mitigation criteria. I don't I don't know that that's actually the case if it's not a closed basin.
Well,
When we design will evaluate the county model and we cannot have any rises in the nodes downstream or upstream of our project. So And from a
I'm saying and I am a modeling standpoint and it's for one storm event and after 30 plus years of practice, my experience is that we model one synthetic storm event. And what usually happens in my experience is it's not the one 25 year, 24 hour storm event that causes the flood. It's the five days in a row of two inches a day, none of which were the design storm. But when we look at that event, then
we find we've overwhelmed those outfalls. And I'm not asking you to design to it, I'm asking you to agree to make an evaluation and report of it when you file your site plan. And then the county staff can decide at their discretion what criteria you should adhere to.
Mr. Moody, the the issue is I think you're asking me to evaluate it as though it were a closed basin. And I don't think that's a good idea.
You are asking us to evaluate it on the basis of criteria that aren't required by the Pasco County Code or the Swift MUD regs, as I'm understanding it. And I can't I just I'm not sure. The commissioner
the other day suggested for your project that it may become a drainage basin of spa special concern. And what I would like to see is if we do some of this stuff voluntarily Maybe we don't start Making this one a drainage basin of special concern and the next place a drainage basin of special concern.
I mean there are technical criteria that have to meet be met on that. I I think we're overreaching on what the county's role is. You can't ask somebody to meet criteria that the code doesn't ask it to meet. I I am telling you I have the the engineer here who's the project engineer that we will evaluate all that. Okay, and we will look at the outfalls and he's not going to design it in such a way that if he feels the outfalls don't work, that we're relying on outfalls that don't work. Well, I understand that.
And I guess if they don't want to second my motion they can do that.
Well I mean to be clear, uh this isn't M P U D. You could you could impose requirements that are more stringent than the code, but it's up to the Planning Commission About whether you want to attempt to do that. Understood.
I I guess if if from what I hear John saying is he he wants them to evaluate it but them not to be the basically it'd be the staff's discretion to hold them to a different criteria. Is that something that we can even decide?
Well I mean I think
I mean you're getting into exaction world that are above and beyond what this project it it's already been the testimony was that there is an existing flooding issue, has nothing to do with this project. So unless it's a closed basin, we need to follow the county and the Swift MUD criteria. I believe our engineer in the exercise of good judgment will make a lot of the evaluations that Mr. Moody is talking about. But the implication is that we then need to give this to county staff and perform additional
analyses so they can evaluate it and require us to do things that are not required of open basins. And I think that is a slippery slope for the county to be going down. I mean we have this stuff for a reason. It's been adopted pursuant to science.
Oh, I and I I mean I I I agree and I think I mean is there at a minimum I think there needs to be a note in the file for when this does come in for site plan approval that this does, you know, get put under the microscope maybe a little harder than anything else. or a normal project just to make sure that um the problem if there's an existing problem there today, which is look like there was in the pictures. that that does not get made worse by the proposed development.
And that's all I'm asking.
Right.
Well, I mean One potential solution is just imposing a condition that they notify this gentleman when they come in for the site plan approval. He he appears to be very interested in some of the very issues that Mr. Moody is.
I think he'd probably make sure that staff does that if he's noticeed notified.
So John, would you do you want to make a motion that we notify him? I'll make a motion
that we notify the I'll withdraw my motion first and I'll amend it such that we ask you to notify the gentleman who spoke and I apologize because I'm not good with names. But yes, that you get notification. At the time of PDP or PSP approved? At the time you file for your PDP your simultaneous PDP, C P S W M, which and that's the part I'm concerned about, the SWM. And and that's that's that's
acceptable to the applicant. Okay, thank you.
Is there a second?
Second? Second. Oh well.
Any other discussion up here or something? Okay, all in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
And sir in the back. Speak with your commissioners about possibly designating in a drainage basin of special concern.