Zoning Amendment (Consent) – Gustavo A and Angela Trejos/Land O Lakes Retail – Change in Zoning from a A-R Agricultural-Residential District to a C-2 General Commercial District – South Central Pasco County – North Side of State Road 54 and Approximately 1,020 Feet West of Wilson Road – Containing Approximately 1.59 Acres
What the county recorded
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
The county’s agenda for Planning Commission, Feb 20, 2025
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
This case, across meetings
PDE-25-7855 in full →PDE-25-7855 was taken up 2 times between Feb 20, 2025 and Mar 25, 2025 — this is appearance 1.
- Feb 20, 2025PlanningPC4▶No disposition in the minutesthis item
- Mar 25, 2025BoardP39▶Approved
What was said
Machine transcription of 4m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 70% of 30 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Anybody here to object? Okay. Yeah. PC4, PDE 25-7855. It's a zoning amendment in the name of Gustavo A and Angelina Trejo slash Land O' Lakes Retail. It's a change in zoning from AR Agricultural Residential District to C2 General Commercial District. It's on the north side of State Road 54, approximately 1,020 feet west. of Wilson Road containing approximately 1.59 acres. The recommendation
is to uh um make a recommendation for approval with the voluntary deed restrictions as provided in your agenda packet.
Okay,
and the applicant present.
Anyone here to object?
Liam, I got one question on that one. Is the Looks like this is only for rezoning of a part of the parcel, correct?
1.59 acres. I believe that is the whole parcel. It's right up on the easement.
The reason I'm asking the question is there's a survey included as an attachment to the agenda. The whole parcel is seven point three five acres. Five point four two acres of that is wetlands. If you go down to the background section, it says one point nine three acres. So I'm assuming the one point nine three is correct, but I just wanted clarification.
Sorry, yes, you are correct. There is um and maybe your zoning visuals will actually show it. Um it is only a partial of the it's just the frontage on State Road 54. The back half is actually conservation lands because it is a wetland. Um I believe they just recently went. through and somebody can correct me if I'm wrong through a comprehensive plan amendment to do so.
David, is it clear enough the way it's written because there's this conflict in the acreage. I just I just wanted to clarify, I didn't want to get stuck later.
Um I believe so. I mean is is the applicant here they can speak to the conflict
The applicant
present.
Mm mm mm.
He raised his hand in the back. Can you come forward please for a second?
But just for the record, we are just rezoning the front portion one place.
Okay.
Good
afternoon.
Okay.
And uh so do you can you give us the exact uh Uh size of the property.
Um the uh as as uh it was described earlier, uh the land encompasses uh upland closer to fifty four and wetland in the back. So I believe the front portion that's upland is one point five nine acres.
And what and and where did you com where did you see one point nine one?
One point nine three is in the background. And I believe if you do the math, I think the one point nine three is correct. Because the survey that's included as exhibit A, the legal description,
So I believe there might be some discrepancies from the background write up petition. That's the general abbreviation. It says 1.93. And then in the subject line it says 1.59. I'm not really sure where that discrepancy is coming from. And then it also states in finding a fact number one, I won't read it, but I'll read the sentence the remainder acreage is 5.53. So I believe there might be some. confusion in the acreage, but we will double check the actual survey that will be just the front portion that is
not part of the conservation and make those corrections.
Okay. Yeah, I have no opposition. I just wanted to point out I just asked the question and get clarification for the applicant. Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Okay, and there is there anybody here to object? Yeah. Okay.
So that was PC four. Moving on to PC five, I believe we have people registered to speak on that item, so that item will be pulled. Okay. Um we also for PC six which is the companion rezoning to that, we have individuals registered to speak on that one so that item will be pulled as well. PC7, you'll be sitting as the local planning agency. It's a comprehensive uh it's PC7 PDE 25-0070. It's a comprehensive plan amendment. Um CPA 2402