Skip to main content
Pasco Countymeeting record
P59No disposition in the minutesPublic hearingPublished agenda

Large-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Regular) - CPAL22(01) Odessa Town Centre PD - Transmittal Of The Proposed Large-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment To The Future Land Use Map (Map 2-15 And Sheet 22) From RES-9 (Residential-9 DU/GA) And ROR (Retail/Office/Residential) To PD (Planned Development) On Approximately 81.47 Acres Of Real Property Located At The Southwest Corner Of The Intersection At State Road 54 And Gunn Hwy; And A Text Amendment Creating Subarea Policy FLU 7.1.68 – Odessa Town Centre PD; And A Map Amendment To The Future Land Use Map 2-9 Adding Subarea Map 2-9(68) Odessa Town Centre PD; And Providing For Additional Text Amendments As Necessary For Internal Consistency

Public Hearings at 1:30 p.m.PDD-23-0148District 3

What the county recorded

Published agenda

Staff recommendation

Approve

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

Published agenda

The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Feb 21, 2023

The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.

Approved minutes

The county’s minutes for Board of County Commissioners, Feb 21, 2023

The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.

This case, across meetings

PDD-23-0148 in full →

PDD-23-0148 was taken up 6 times between Jan 19, 2023 and Jun 20, 2023, continued 1 time — this is appearance 3.

  1. Jan 19, 2023PlanningRES9No disposition in the minutes
  2. Feb 16, 2023PlanningRES9No disposition in the minutes
  3. Feb 21, 2023BoardP59No disposition in the minutesthis item
  4. Mar 21, 2023BoardP51Approved
  5. May 23, 2023BoardP55Continued
  6. Jun 20, 2023BoardP45Adopted

What was said

Transcript

Machine transcription of 4m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 80% of 25 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

Read it in the meeting →
Starkey

In the Tampa Bay Times on January 4, 2023, and by affidavit of certified mail.

Denise

Um this following item P59 is PDD 230148. This was to be the transmittal for a large-scale comprehensive plan amendment, C PAL 2201, Odessa Town Center PD. However, the team is requesting, this is a county-initiated uh comprehensive plan amendment. The team is requesting a continuance to the March 21st, 2023. Um Board of County Commissioners meeting at one thirty in Newport Ritchie because the area is expanded. We've added

some property. So that needs to be renoticed.

Starkey

Um so I have a question on this, Mr. Chairman. Go ahead. This is and just for a little background, this is a project that we started. And I just want to give other commissioners a heads up that they can do this too in their districts if You know, if you s find a place that you think this would benefit. Um this is Gunon fifty four where the old flea market used to be. And it's an interesting quadrant surrounded by the Cemetery uh and um a road to the south that I'm gonna think

of the name that goes that the bus Interlake Interlaken. Interlock 'em Interlakin. Um and we were very worried that it was gonna be piecemealed into development in a and a poor planning process and that and people were swirling all around it to buy it and everyone wanted to put multifamily. And there's job great job potential there if we do it right. So we initiated a board, what do you call it?

Denise

Initiated. County initiated comprehensive plan amendment.

Starkey

Yeah, co uh County initiated comprehensive plan amendment. But I and so I listened to it on the com uh and I saw that we added Mark Blanton added his piece, but why can't we go ahead and send this and then just add that? Why do we have to hold this up? 'Cause I'd I'd rather not hold it up personally, 'cause I know people are knocking on those people's doors and I wanna preserve what we can. Sure.

Amy Heiler

Amy Heiler with Long Range Planning. So it's my understanding that due to the boundary change, we needed to renotice and per statute 14 days before the public hearing, so we didn't have that enough time to renotice. It was also at the direction of our CAO to ensure that we do notice because we wanted to make sure that we sent DEO all of the accurate information. Change we don't want to send them something and then have them review and have a modified change too. So we wouldn't have to do that.

Yes, they are, yes, correct. So so it's just it's more of a statutory alignment.

Starkey

David, were you gonna say something?

Unidentified speakerVoice A

If you're adding property to If you're adding property to what you're noticing for a land use approval, you need to renotice it. You're you're making it bigger than what it was before.

Starkey

Which is a good thing. All right. I'm just ready for this to be

Unidentified speakerVoice A

I'm excited for you guys

Starkey

to see it.

Unidentified speakerVoice A

At the at the final adoption.

Starkey

All right. All right. I was so excited to vote on this today.

Unidentified speakerVoice B

There we have a motion.

Starkey

I'll motion to continue. Sadly.

Unidentified speakerVoice B

To March twenty first. To

Starkey

March twenty first.

Thank you.

MarianoChair

All in favor say aye.

Bradford

Aye.

MarianoChair

Any opposed?

Bradford

Just for the record, Mr. Chairman, I knew all that.