Zoning Amendment (Consent) - Sun City County Line North MPUD – Mary Eleanor Taube – Rezoning Request from A-C Agricultural District to MPUD Master Planned Unit Development District to Allow for the Development of 156 Platted Townhomes, 10,000 Square Feet of Commercial/Retail Space (with the Potential to Convert the Commercial/Retail to Office Uses), and Associated Infrastructure on Approximately 19.385 Acres Located in Northwest Pasco County

1:42:07P sixty three was advertised in Tampa Bay Times March fifth, twenty twenty five, um and by affidavit of certified postings or certified mailings and site postings.

1:42:18William Vermillion Planning Development Economic Growth PD 257849, the Sun City County Line Road North MPUD. It's a rezoning request from AC Agricultural to MPUD Master Plan Unit Development. To allow for the maximum development of 156 platted townhomes and 10,000 square feet of commercial retail along the frontage of County Line Road with associated infrastructure on roughly 19 acres. This is gonna sound a little bit familiar to the project you just heard, its next door neighbor, its location

1:42:48map being the same. North County Line Road. the subject site. We're just moving a little bit over to the to the east to the next parcel. the current zoning agricultural, the future land use being res one. Here is the same context map with just the next door parcel highlighted, showing you the overall context. Um industrial, the North Ridge, it's all the same. The the difference with this one, three

1:43:19variations from the code this time, the first one being from 9016011 Street Design and Dedication Requirements. This is not proposing an interconnect to the south for the same reason as it's Uh the previous project with the North Ridge MPD already being at for Platte, there was there was no room for vehicular access.

1:43:38The second variation from table nine oh one three A. This is the emergency access, one functional access requirement in the land development code. the applicant is proposing to um to have one access at at this current time because of the interconnects to the west and east at the at the time that this is being built, the infrastructure might not necessarily be there. uh for that to function as an emergency access as it's not yet built.

1:44:07And from nine oh five two table E.

1:44:14This is for

1:44:18The uh the visual buffering internal to the project.

1:44:21I yeah, I have a question on that.

1:44:22Perfect. The the applicant is requesting no visual screen between the residential and the non-residential portions of the project. No

1:44:28screen?

1:44:29No screen too, so that they can enhance uh the pedestrian walkability as well as the activation of the commercial. By letting both be in the same eyesight as people walk down that eight foot path down the center that connects all three.

1:44:41But what about on the east side? Because that's isn't that heavy industrial?

1:44:47And then you can go back here. The the buffering requirements will be the same. on the per per the land development code between the industrial property. This was purely for the internal Um variation from nine oh five two?

1:45:00Um I I uh I have to tell you I'm I'm moving against vinyl fences and these kind of um situations, I think it should be masonry, either concrete block or or brick. Um so I would just ask that. But on the east side.

1:45:15Absolutely. I can certainly let the applicant speak to that.

1:45:20Here's the binding MPUD plan, the binding concept plan. for this project. They have the same linear park space down the center of the development as it as the previous and in place of the l east to west park space that the other project had, that's where this ten thousand square feet of commercial is gonna be located. With that eight-foot path running along the north side of that reverse frontage road, and of course conditions of approval orienting these buildings to the frontage of County Line Road for maximum activation. And this comes

1:45:49to you with a recommendation of approval from both the Planning Commission as well as the Planning Development Economic Growth Department. I'm here for any questions.

1:45:57Well, you know, when when we pull a building up to a road And we say mass maximum activation. That it needs to be against a trail, not necessarily a sidewalk, um in my opinion. Or else you you maybe sighted to the interior road. So I d I guess I would ask Terry. Do you think it's better for that building to be sited? Against County Line Road or Make it a little bit. Um where it's

1:46:27instead of having the parking lot against the big pond, you have restaurants against that big pond behind it and or something and maybe it that becomes

1:46:43more walkable opportunity.

1:46:45Sure. Uh Nictario Spito's playing development and economic growth. Um It it's really a a philosophical question because either we prioritize the buildings towards the main thoroughfares, which in this case would be County Line Road, although we know that Um County Line is going to be under construction for some time. When they actually commence that construction is is still um unknown at this point. However, uh the flip side is you would put these buildings towards

1:47:15the main thoroughfares, but then what is that getting you? Because are you getting the pedestrian activity? that you would normally get in a sort of downtown environment if you're up against a four-lane or six-lane Main arterial. Uh we when we looked at the three projects that are along Climbing Light Road here, Northridge. Sun Coast Village which we just heard and Sun City, this project Um we determined that it would be better than the right-of-way. To prioritize the internal road network. and get the neighbors who are actually

1:47:46there today Able to walk to and from the various commercial amenities that they're going to have between their development. And to the extent that you would have a building overlooking water with maybe some outdoor seating over the water. and people walk by the the detention pond, not as a detention pond, but as a water feature or amenity. that sort of doubles up and help helps to beautify the neighborhood. Um this was sort of the idea that we put together. Oh

1:48:11so they can do that? Because I thought he said it had to be pulled up to the road. And uh for me it seems

1:48:16like that works well. Yeah, the idea is that you wouldn't have parking separating uh where people live and are walking and the business. Which

1:48:27is in the back.

1:48:28Right. So to the extent that you have no parking, but maybe there is green space, maybe there Maybe the building is all the way up to the road. So it just depends on the design how they do it. But n nevertheless, you're not walking past a parking field to get to the building. You're walking past something that's more pleasurable to walk past though.

1:48:45Okay.

1:48:49something traffic calming like on street parking. uh or something work i is what's needed when you're making a road more walkable and getting that feel and I don't we don't have on street parking on co on County Line Road or Correct. Yeah, so I think, you know, it's interesting discussion.

1:49:09Yeah, i this frontage road is basically a lo another type of local road.

1:49:13Is there on street parking on that frontage road?

1:49:16They're probably could could well fit some on street parking capability. Yeah.

1:49:23Okay, any other questions? And um so Barbara, if you could show them what I asked. Um so I have a lot of angst for a eight unit townhome. I don't think it's a good idea. And so they graciously have reduced the amount of eight unit townhomes. To two. Yes.

1:49:45So they can only have two eight unit buildings and they redid their plan to accommodate that, as well as the eight foot sidewalk. um eight foot path, the internal path, instead of five feet they went to eight feet.

1:50:00Does anyone else have any other questions on this? Commissioner Oakley, you good? It has that same motion.

1:50:09Did we already do public comment?

1:50:11Uh you need to probably put it in to the record.

1:50:14We need to take public comment.

1:50:15Oh public comment. Okay. Uh does anyone is there anyone here wishes to speak to this item? So

1:50:21I do have someone signed up. Okay. Miss Mary Tarby.

1:50:25Is Mary here?

1:50:28Did you want to come up and speak?

1:50:33No? She she okay. Anyone else? Anyone online? No ma'am. Okay, back to us.

1:50:41Move approval P sixty three with the condition on the new proposed COA prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within the project. Developers shall pay the county the sum of fifty thousand dollars, which may be used by the county. Towards sidewalk improvements on Shady Hills Road. The payment shall not be mobility fee credible. The developer shall not be required to construct a sidewalk path along the project's county line frontage road. A road finish.

1:51:06Second.

1:51:08All right. Um all in favor? Aye. Opposed? All right. P