Zoning Amendment Substantial Modification (Consent) - Double Branch MPUD Formerly Known As Pasco Town Center MPUD – PTC Boyette, LLC, et al. – A Rezoning Request to Substantially Modify the Double Branch MPUD Master Planned Unit Development District to Amend the Name of the MPUD to the Double Branch MPUD and to Amend the MPUD Entitlements, to Increase the Industrial Entitlements from 4,000,000 Square feet to 6,000,000 Square Feet and to Increase the Office Entitlements from 725,000 Square Feet to 1,725,000 Square Feet and Associated Infrastructure on Approximately 966.87 Acres Located in Central Pasco County

32:16Good afternoon. William Premillion, Planning Development, Economic Growth. This is the Companion Item PDE twenty six seventy-eight eighty one. This is a substantial modification. to the Pasco Town Center M PewD. Part of the substantial modification is changing the name from Pasco Townsender to Double Branch. So From henceforth in the presentation when I say double branch, I mean Pasco Town Center and vice versa. Okay.

32:48Here's the location map. Just south State Road fifty two, nine seventy five corridor in the exchange. This substantial modifical modification, like Joel mentioned previously, was mandated by the third economic development agreement amended, approved by the Board December of 2024. This specifically increases the industrial entitlements by two million square feet to a total of six million square feet. and increases the office entitlements from 725,000

33:18to 1.725 million square feet of office. as well as changes the name.

33:27Here's the location map showing just on the south side of State Road 52. It is within the connected city Special district boundary although not opted in. The current zoning reflecting MPUD and the future land use of employment center.

33:48So For the context map. Here I put on the vision road layer for the connected city boundaries because in the GIS department they had the layer set as connected city as one MPUD, so the whole area is just green, which isn't true. However, on this map you can see several vision roads, and in the vicinity of this project you have the Abbey Crossing MP, Murata, Kinton, Aprile, Remington and then Nest Hockey to

34:18the south.

34:22Mm. Here's the MPD master plan, which shows the Vision Road Network within the MPUD plan. from north to south, which are obligations of the Third Economic Development Agreement. This is the connectivity plan. that Mr. Goldstein spoke about. Um You can see here the several trail segments that both run along the master roadway plan as well as meander outside of the right-of-way boundaries. with some starring to indicate

34:52neighborhood parks and community hubs that are obligated through this MPD substantial modification. Could

34:57you also point out the bus stops since we discussed that?

34:59Yeah, so there are also transit stops located with this within this MPD, which were uh a part of the original approval of Pasco Town Center that there were to be transit stops here to facilitate between the residential and the employment generating that's going on within this master plan unit development.

35:20There is one variation that is related to the connectivity plan from 905-1. which um Parks Wreck and Natural Resources was kind enough to help out with. and facilitate uh in their recommendation of approval in this uh variation request This is specifically from the minimum size, minimum dimensions, and open plate areas within the mixed-use development. The specific requirements of this are found within conditions 12 and condition five.

35:49the the justification overall being without reading you the three paragraphs of justification that are in the agenda memo. is that special consideration needed to be taken for overall park space due to the mixed use development and the residential typology that's found within the MPUD, as well as being supported by the overall connectivity plan to get people from north to south, east to west, employment to residential to support commercial.

36:18This comes with a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners from staff. I'm here if you have any questions.

36:24All right. Any questions for Will? I thought of one question. I'm not sure if it's for you or just kind of a side question. I drive through that intersection uh by seventy five and fifty two almost every day. I is what's the long term I mean is there any Plans by DOT to try to you know that that southbound I-75 on ramp is gets pretty backed up in the morning. Sure. I was just curious what the long term is for that intersection.

36:53Thank you. That's a great question. So right now the DOT has approved the project. The flying J trip circulation is being adjusted, so we're gonna mitigate those conflicting tractor trailer turns. Movements across the highway and also DOT, I met with DOT two weeks ago. The the ramping to get on and off of uh I-75 is gonna be um is engineered and they're gonna implement a capital project there shortly.

37:17Okay. Thank you.

37:18Mr

37:19Engel, is that there also a planned parallel road to the north?

37:26Oh well that's a good point too. It's on a DOT initiative, but with uh I-75 gateway, the Hines family, uh they just broke broke ground yesterday. They're gonna build what's called the Ozzy Murphy extension underneath I-75 and connect Pasco Road where the target facility is. So that'll provide a vehicular bypass to the congestion down on seventy-five and fifty-two.

37:49Nice. When do um so they broke ground any other

37:55three years or four years, but um they're they're they're in with DOT now getting approvals.

38:01Is the uh the cross county trail gonna go on through that underpass

38:06as well? It is, it is, and uh the alignment between 52 and getting up to that crossing is already um you know embedded in the I-75 gateway plan, and that's part of the cross section going underneath I-75. Okay. Two travel lanes for vehicles and the Orange Bell Trail. Yes sir. Thank you. Thank you.

38:34Okay.

38:38I don't have anything to add for the applicant.

38:40Nothing.

38:41Okay. Did you Have public comment again or if you want to speak again or no.

38:49Uh I think she's

38:50You done? Okay, all right. Well can I answer a question? If you ask her to come up to the podium. Yeah, she's gotta come up to the podium so we can catch her on the record if you wanna ask.

39:01exactly.

39:04Yes.

39:05I was curious about the type of buffer you thought might be appropriate for your facility.

39:12Um I'm thinking that natural buffer is always better. So trees, you know, obviously are more appealing. They absorb sound sometimes better than having like just a brick wall or something, but something that would be appealing and also just you know, I'm gonna say rewarding Yeah. If if that i the trees aren't in the budget, they don't grow quickly enough then probably a walls or a fence. So I think whatever would be the most appropriate that we could put up quickly, 'cause trees could take a while to grow, so

39:42Yeah. All right.

39:44Thank you.

39:45Thank you. And then to staff, is there a buffer that's required?

39:56So odd oddly enough, the the parcel that this lady owns when we talk about the future land use amendment actually isn't a part of the MPUD and it r will retain its current zoning. So the buffering requirements that exist today would still exist then until they came in for rezoning. Right, so the M Pud boundary actually stops to the north of the property, the Miller property which he's talking about. The M Pud boundary is actually the northern boundary of the Miller property, which is what this embutties obligated

40:26to Buffer for that on the map so we can do that.

40:33So I I noticed at least on this preliminary site plan that there was multifamily slated to border that property, but you know, I know this is early stages and I know Mr. Tube mentioned it's likely that's going to be retention areas, but at least on this plant does show multifamily bordering. So

40:54well right, so that the property Mr. Two was mentioning would be to be to the south of that what's indicated as multifamily on the M Pud for the retention area. It's just actually not a part of the M P boundary. Okay, I gotcha.

41:14Yeah, Jules too again to clarify that. Because the current plan, as I said, is likely stormwater drainage. It's not even necessary to rezone that EC parcel that part yet because if it's just stormwater drainage, you can do off-site stormwater drainage. So back to my prior point is if for some reason that changes, they would actually have to come back through a zoning modification to add the parcel. So th you'll have a bite at that apple. uh so to speak, if

41:44there's actually a use proposed for the parcel adjacent to her. Otherwise it'll just stay in its natural state or simply be stormwater retention and and no use really to buffer. It is a little confusing 'cause it's in the Plan Amendment, the parcel is, but that parcel is not in the MQD mod.

42:02Yep. Gotcha. Right, thank you.

42:09Okay, was that it for comment?

42:15All right.

42:16Move to recommend approval of item PC six.

42:19I'll second. We

42:20have a motion and a second. Any further discussion of the motion? If not. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye, aye. Opposed, like signed. All right.