Zoning Amendment (Regular) – Jorge and Rosa Oliveras/Jorge Oliveras – Change in Zoning from an A-R Agricultural Residential District with Conditions to an A-R Agricultural Residential District – East Central Pasco County – Southwest Side of US Highway 98 and Approximately 300 feet North of Townsend Road – Containing Approximately 3.32 acres.

52:54Item P12. It's the first item on the regular agenda. It's PDE 267863, a zoning amendment in the name of Jorge and Rosa Oliveras, Jorge Oliveres for a change in zoning from AR Agricultural Residential District with conditions to AR Agricultural Residential District, located in east-central Pasco County, on the southwest side of U.S. Highway 98 and approximately 300 feet north of town. Road containing approximately three point three two acres to be presented by staff.

53:30Hello again.

53:35So the item before you is actually interesting. So it does have a story that goes with it, so I'll probably I'll try to present it in the best way possible. Item before you is PDE 26-7863. It is a zoning amendment request from AR Agricultural Residential with Conditions to AR agricultural residential. The proposal is a rezoning amendment. The current future or current zoning is AR Agricultural Residential District with conditions.

54:05It was conditioned back in 2006. The change is to remove those conditions to allow for a further splitting of their subject site. The future land use is Res 3, residential three dwelling units per gross acre, and a They are seeking this change to subdivide the parcel into three lots with a dwelling unit on each lot in conformance with the AR Agricultural Residential District standards for development. It is located on the southwest side of U.S. Highway 98, approximately

54:35300 feet of Townsend Road. Here's a location map showing the general proximity in the east market area.

54:46Here's an aerial view of the subject site. So the subject site is part of the rezoning that occurred. And actually falls along this entire triangle area. So the conditions of the rezoning apply on this whole area, not just the subject site itself.

55:09Here's a context map showing the area and proximity to the city limits.

55:16The future land use is res 3, residential three dwelling units per gross acre.

55:23And the zoning is AR agricultural residential. Uh this boundary surveys to show At the subject site of the rezoning, I'll go into the conditions for this. What ended up occurring in 2006 is that they were deed restrictions, restricted to a certain number of units on this entire triangular piece. They were permitted 14 acres, 14 acres on the west side. 14 acres

55:53on the left side. This can get six units. Ten acres on the east side can achieve four units for a total of ten units in this area.

56:05So the subject site, actually I'll just go through the, I think it's better for me just to explain it to you. So the subject site. Is One of four current parcels. So as you can see here, it's one of four parcels. This area is currently restricted to four units. Two of these four parcels have a are constructed with one residential unit. Therefore there are two units

56:35left available for this area per the conditions and the deed restriction. The challenge that staff PDE has with this and so I'll go through some of the conditions and then we'll can go into a deeper conversation. These are just some of the findings of facts to show that it's currently having a mobile home on the three acres. That three acres is what they want to split into three one-acre lots. What will end up happening? They want to remove the cap so they can construct

57:05their homes. What will end up happening, staff is proceeding with a recommendation of denial, which is why I'm going a little bit out of order. Yeah. Staff's recommendation of denial on this is not necessarily because we don't disagree with what they want to do. Unfortunately, as a result of these deed restrictions that occurred or conditions that occurred on the rezoning of the total 24 acres, if we were to remove the conditions for

57:35this one subject site, those limitations, the density limitations, would still apply. If we were enabling them to remove these restrictions and split their lot into three lots to get two more units, that would take away the units from the other people who are still currently under this limited restriction. Unfortunately, during the review process, we attempted to contact the property owners in this entire area. The applicant also attempted to contact the property

58:05owners in this entire area. They are under an LLC that is no longer active. So unfortunately, we are not unable to get in touch with them to try to bring them into this potential rezoning. So because of those facts and the potential inadvertent issue that would be resulting of this proposed rezoning, staff is recommending denial of the proposed. Do you have any questions for me?

58:32Um what do you have a solution for us?

58:38Uh it's it is it is up to the the Planning Commissioner Board's discretion as to how we would proceed with this.

58:45That's easier.

58:47Res three? Correct. Yeah.

58:51So mm mm basically they're asking for w uh one additional unit.

58:56Um originally they were asking for to split the lot into two or three lots. So it's currently one lot. They would have to do a subdivision plan to get three lots total. We have um worked with them current previously, they have brought that down to keeping the existing home that is there. Um adding coming in for an ADU so the mother can have her residence and give her son the mobile home and

59:26then split it so she can give the other half to her other son who wants to construct a home.

59:33Okay.

59:36So is it okay. Is the applicant present, by the way?

59:44Okay.

59:49Describe this as a deed restriction because This is so

59:55There's both.

59:57Oh there is both.

59:59Yeah, the zoning was from two thousand and six and back then they were conditioning those zonings.

1:00:04But there is a deed restriction.

1:00:06There is also a deed restriction.

1:00:17So Well you're talking about the

1:00:23D constriction.

1:00:24Either one, yes.

1:00:29But we can't

1:00:30get rid of both of them. They're both binding at this point.

1:00:32But we can only speak to the D I mean to the zoning.

1:00:37But to answer the Chairman's question, the only solution I can think of that doesn't negatively impact the other property owners that are subject to that restriction would be That if that property owner is not going to come in and Also rezoning. Yeah, county initiated rezoning of the of All of the law.

1:01:01Yeah, and unfortunately we just don't have the authority to do to do that at this time since we can't get in touch with the surrounding property owners.

1:01:09Cool. County initiated you. Dude. Who it is a county initiated rezoning.

1:01:20Okay, and who who

1:01:21That's not what's before you today, is it? Yeah, correct. We don't have a county initiative resigned before you today.

1:01:29So if if I don't see any reason not to try to help if we can, so um I don't know how the board feels, but if there's a way to do it, maybe we oughta specify how how that could be done and then we can vote one way or the other.

1:01:49Yeah, could you walk through that? It's kind of confusing. Could you walk through that once more just so we're crystal clear on it?

1:01:55Sure. So in 2006, there was a rezoning that conditioned this entire triangle area. At that point in time, it was split into the two lots that you see here. And in that rezoning, The western side was granted was limited to six lots on fourteen acres, and the eastern side was limited to um four lots on the fourteen acres. In the conditions Let's just be fair. The math isn't mathing

1:02:26because they're saying there's a total of fourteen units, so the the six plus four is ten units. But that's just we'll just say it's a scribbler's area on that side. Um so Basically, we'll go to this one. So that was 2006 delineation and in Two thousand and eighteen, this was split off. This is a parent parcel. It still remained the same. And then in 2021, I believe, these

1:02:57two were created. And out of those four lots, there are two constructed homes and two vacant lots. So there are essentially two units, two homes still available to utilize in this space. If we were to allow them to do that currently, it would almost treat it as like a first come, first served basis and inadvertently restrict the other two vacant parcels if we keep it as is.

1:03:29But there is a unit on the on the

1:03:32on the subject. That's why currently is

1:03:34so that could be grandfathered.

1:03:42I understand. Problem if it's a deep restriction.

1:03:52But it's it's a zoning condition and this applicant is not seeking to lift the zoning condition. their neighbor's property.

1:04:03Yeah.

1:04:04If they were we wouldn't be in this situation.

1:04:09So what's a re what what do you recommend as a solution?

1:04:13I think that's why Amy said if they had come in with their neighbors together as a team The list is restrictions. We wouldn't

1:04:23have nature. Yeah. So the fear is penalizing the dealer. This is

1:04:27otherwise like David had mentioned

1:04:29This is the applicant. So l let me see what she questions she might have. Don't go far, Amy.

1:04:34My name is Rosa Olivera, my husband, Jorge Oliveira. Um so in that corner lot where she said that there was a parent law. But they um sold the home. They abandoned it. Um they sold it to someone that apparently was wanting to do like commercial. Um so that house is empty, stripped, there's nobody living there. Um Is that the

1:05:00mobile home?

1:05:01Um no it's a uh block home.

1:05:04And it's on that on that pink triangle?

1:05:07Yeah. On the other triangle. On the other corner. Southeast corner.

1:05:14Here it went away, they were not a problem.

1:05:18So there is no one to be found, even the letters that I sent out to let them know that there was gonna be a public hearing They all have returned back to me. Return to sender. I have all four letters that were addressed that was um provided by um uh county. So no one to be found. Um the last that I heard my husband had spoken to the person that bought

1:05:49I guess the fourteen acres.

1:05:52And uh apparently he is a Canadian that purchased that in um

1:06:02What he wanted to do was basically make like commercial and or um residential and and make money.

1:06:11What seems like one possible solution is for the If we can uh m if somebody want to make a motion that We'd do a county initiated rezoning for the entire property so that everybody would be treated fairly.

1:06:29Um it would be either the four lots that are limited to the well, yeah, I guess it's up to you. David, correct me if I'm wrong. It could either be the four lots that are limited to the four units or the entire thing that's limited to the ten units.

1:06:51The big piece and the other four.

1:06:55It's really a that's really a planning question because I it Planning commission doesn't feel there's any basis for the original restriction at all, then It makes sense to just lift it on the entire thing. For me now. At a minimum you would need to lift it on the four lots because that's what's causing the problem. But if you don't feel like

1:07:16It makes

1:07:17sense on the other side either, you could just have the entire Restriction lifted.

1:07:26Yeah, well I think it would be m it would make sense at a minimum to to uh make a motion to Um do a county initiated rezoning on at least the four lots.

1:07:51Location probably has changed Finally because of the The surrounding area, I mean it Looks like there's been some pretty substantial road improvements in this area since

1:08:04And since since it was originally back when this restriction was imposed, so I'm not sure that the density limitation. It is originally imposed necessarily still makes sense. That's again that's a planning issue, not a We'll have to decide. But

1:08:25It may s make some sense if you're gonna lift the restrictions and just lift it on the higher thing.

1:08:29Mm-hmm.

1:08:30I don't know three through.

1:08:33Didn't move.

1:08:34To me it doesn't make sense if you're gonna lift it on the four lots to keep it on the other six, but

1:08:39I think that's a good thing.

1:08:41kind of similarly situated or at the same intersection.

1:08:46Okay.

1:08:47And if you look right next door there's some Project it looks like it has quite a few.

1:08:54Pretty high density. I don't know what that is.

1:09:00And disappeared again.

1:09:02Amy, what is that project to the west that's

1:09:13All right, well, that right there. This is a recommendation of d

1:09:30We're just talking

1:09:30about what synonyms. Right now we're just talking about solutions, but Um

1:09:35it I believe that staff is recommended denial because of primarily because of the impact on the vacant landowners.

1:09:44Unintended,

1:09:45right, impact.

1:09:49We're saying before we make it.

1:09:53May may I speak.

1:09:54Yes, you should be hearing if there's anybody else in here. Yes.

1:09:57Sorry. Um I brought something that you know to read over because I get nervous. It's my first time doing this. Uh so good afternoon. To um I didn't know if I was gonna be in front of a judge, so your honor, commissioners, chairman, leaders, because I don't this is obviously my first time. Uh we have been residents of Pasco County, Dade City, since nineteen eighties. Um our petition is to remove all restrictions and

1:10:27allow us Jorge and Rosa Oliveras to re uh divide the property into three parcels. Our American dream is to be able to pass on inheritance to our two sons, Fabian and Caleb Oliveras, and the generations to come. By allowing for three parcels, we'll allow them to build homes adjacent to our home. Each parcel will have at least a minimum of one acre. We have lived previously in a neighborhood of

1:10:58at in Wesley Chapel, [address removed], where there was HOA restrictions and had to sell our what we thought was our forever home. Because of restrictions, unable to park on our driveway company, truck, etc., because it was restricted by the HOA. We purchased land in Dade City in hopes of getting away from restrictions on our property. We have endured two and a half since March, two years of this,

1:11:29uh to resone this parcel and have the capability to divide it into three portions and have spent thousands and when I say thousands, I'm not kidding, it's been about fifty to fift forty to fifty K. in this process. Uh we're not asking to build apartments, complexes, neighborhoods, or trailer parks that make profit. Uh we just want to live our American dream. and pass generational wealth to our sons. This vision was started by my father, Jorge

1:11:59Reyes, may he rest in peace, just passed in March. Um my siblings, Jorge Reyes, Diana Wickfall, and my mother. Aida Ray is live down the road on 98. My mom's address is [address removed]. It's my parents. In the middle. My brother and my sister on each side. So It

1:12:30will be his in in his honor for this to know that his little girl has been able to fulfill this dream, to have all his family nearby. Okay.

1:12:40That's great. Thank you very much.

1:12:44Was there anybody else here to speak on that? And

1:12:46can you come back, ma'am?

1:12:49He does that to everybody.

1:13:01Department of Transportation.

1:13:04DOT has been involved in in this. Yeah, they're already approved and everything. We w we had to go like when I said we had to go through a lot, we have gone through a lot for the past two years.

1:13:21County Ad Opted to

1:13:24initiate a rezoning

1:13:25over all of these affected properties. Amen. Talked about two different options you had. One was

1:13:36Mm-hmm.

1:13:38Correct.

1:13:39Selling the other lot to a sibling.

1:13:43My oldest son, Fabian.

1:13:45And then The other option is dividing the lot into three parts.

1:13:53the current mobile home that we're living in. Um and the reason why we put a mobile home was because we obviously didn't want to tie up the rest of the property.

1:14:03Had I asked you if you've spoken

1:14:07Yep.

1:14:11advised you of this.

1:14:12They're gonna give us one um driveway. Yes. They they're aware and they know Yeah. Yeah.

1:14:24That qualifies as something called a common plan of development.

1:14:28It will be subject to Swift MUT Stormwater approvals and it will be subject to the DOT stormwater approvals. Yeah.

1:14:36After you're done meeting them, you won't have any property left or much property left to build your house.

1:14:41Yeah, so they

1:14:43so I liked Amy's first suggestion of simply spitting the lot and building the ADU.

1:14:52I'm just letting you know.

1:14:58if you cut this into three lots you may open up a a very expensive boondoggle that you're not anticipating.

1:15:08So we um have an engineer, she wasn't able to come and be present, but as far as what the planning was um by DOT there was not gonna be a requirement for what you're saying. There was gonna be

1:15:25the OT is not Swift Mutt.

1:15:26Yeah.

1:15:28There was gonna do this into three lots, you will trigger those regulations. You will also trigger our county's subdivision regulations.

1:15:38Which is We are willing to just split it in two and do like a sub

1:15:47A ADU. Yes. That would be advised. So initially when we went when we purchased the land, the property, we had gone to um

1:16:03to here to the courthouse, well across. Um and and found out that we were able to split the property at that time, but then it basically came to this, that uh they were we were told incorrectly that we were not able to split the land in two.

1:16:26Alright. So yeah, I think what John's saying is probably the simplest solution is the ADU. That that route. Yes. Would that be You you would find that helpful.

1:16:43Just wanna make sure you beat that. If you understand that, that's all.

1:16:49Support of where Chairman Mariano.

1:16:51This thing. Just wanna make sure that we don't Drip yourself up. If all this happens in your favor.

1:17:01Okay. So and there's nobody else here to speak on this? Amy, you have anything else to add? Any comments?

1:17:08Amy, if you could come back up to the podium, so

1:17:14Explain to me why The county did not initiate a rezoning rezo.

1:17:19Um just because it's Basically we need the property owners to give us the authority to do those changes unless the board gives us that direction.

1:17:34Sure. What do you

1:17:38Planning commission recommends so what do you need?

1:17:42Uh we can either convert this into a county initiated and bring in the rest of the parcels or we can leave this stand alone with the direction of bringing the remaining parcels in at a during a county initiated.

1:17:58County Administrator rezoning uh requires different types of notice. So uh

1:18:06Zoning to a county initiative rezoning. Oh yeah.

1:18:12Then the question would be whether or not we proceed with this as is, um, with the assumption of what the recommendation would be. And Or we pause it and come back next month with the staff initiated. With everything.

1:18:32And I'm not sure, David, you could probably help with this if it's up to the Planning Commission to make that decision. Or if it's up to the board to make that decision.

1:18:44Plan amendments before.

1:18:47Yeah, plan amendments are a little different. We they're not subject to that level of approval. From the property owners? We're uh where we're referring to oh

1:18:59you're referring to the rule that says seventy five percent of the property owners unless the board

1:19:04Um I'm not aware of that now. I was just under the presumption that Zoning matters. If you're doing a rezoning or changing any zoning, it is required to have the property owners' authority to do that.

1:19:18It's not true for a board initiative zone, but let me just

1:19:24Yeah, I think this uh I'm not gonna speak for everybody on the board at the moment, but I think the whole idea is to try to solve this problem without creating any more expense. Um for this applicant.

1:19:38Of course.

1:19:39And there must be a way that we can do that.

1:19:41And

1:19:44The board initiated

1:19:47Well I there is there was a there is a rule that I thought the name he was referring to I'm trying to work the other side. Yeah.

1:20:00Yeah.

1:20:17Okay.

1:20:21Applications

1:20:25Now one thought. Um

1:20:30Hate to say another deed restriction, but since this is rezoning to agriculture, there is a required deed restriction for the Live Local. Perhaps we can condition it to allow them to continue moving forward with a condition in the deed restriction that says this isn't effective until the county initiates the remaining is an option.

1:21:03I'm not sure how that gets that really gets them anywhere.

1:21:09And delay the time until they can do anything anyway.

1:21:11Yeah.

1:21:12No, that really helps them.

1:21:15Um Recommend approval on the condition.

1:21:22Right. Something along those lines.

1:21:32I mean you could you could approve it, but I mean the the downside is that that person basically lost their development rights until the county initiated something.

1:21:49I don't think we conditioned Euclidean Resonance. Have not. We don't think we conditioned the Euclidean resonance.

1:21:55No, we can't. Right. That's why the D restriction is like your little band-aid to do that.

1:22:03Well, I'm not so worried about the property of the people we can't find. Evidently they're not that interested.

1:22:09Yeah, they came in for an M P D a few years ago but it died out. I think it was called Mayfield or Mayflower.

1:22:20It It would

1:22:21I mean the bottom is on the player with trigger it now.

1:22:27And we can guarantee that comes fairly swiftly after this, the county initiated.

1:22:38That works too.

1:22:42So ask the engineers on the board, does that trigger the problem of dividing it into three? If the county initiates it.

1:22:52Well if the county initiated rezoning and we didn't have Problems. By virtue of dividing it into three lots you would trigger our sub the county subdivision regulation.

1:23:11With mud rules and deals.

1:23:19which you're going to be treated like a subdivision, which means you have one entrance, you're going to have to meet all of their access and drainage criteria. Whereas if they make Simple lot split so that this only be two bots then they are exempt from our county subdivision regulations.

1:23:44Single family residences for purposes of driveways by the D O T.

1:23:49Yeah, I'll make a option for an MRS in this scenario. They also have the option for a minor rural subdivision.

1:23:57This was res three.

1:23:58Oh, yes, thank you. It is res three. However, in twenty twenty-four, uh the development review, Brad, at that point in time authorized them to do a variance. A variance against the code so they can do a minor role subdivision in a res three.

1:24:16Authorized that.

1:24:17Brad Tippen? He's no longer with us.

1:24:23So I would say that that would be a fresh determination for today.

1:24:27Okay, so I found the code provision I was referring to. Or two point one and What it says is that Euclidean zoning amendments can be initiated initiated by The Board of County Commissioners Petition of owners of seventy five percent or more of the area involved or the property owner. So

1:24:50They obviously can't get the property whenever. We either have to get seventy five percent or more of the area involved, so they could either get

1:25:00I don't know if they could they were able to get the other thing.

1:25:04Three lights.

1:25:06The other group of lots

1:25:10Potentially affected. Yeah,

1:25:12do we have how is area being defined? Is there a certain

1:25:16seventy five percent of the area involved? Okay. I don't know if if you include the other how many lots and is it six lots of the other six is six?

1:25:25Um it's restricted to six, but it's only one lot right now. Have

1:25:30you talked to that owner?

1:25:31They they're all owned by the same L L C and they're getting Oh

1:25:34it's all the same owner.

1:25:35Correct.

1:25:36Okay.

1:25:37So unfortunately we can't get in touch with them.

1:25:40Where the board does it? Then it would be the board. So the board could initiate for the whole thing.

1:25:47Um

1:25:50But the board has initiated Or does I'm sure if the staff asked the board to do it in this circumstance the board?

1:25:59And instead of a denial we could adjust our recommendation to seek the board's authority to execute it.

1:26:08But then would that trigger this extra cost for the

1:26:11for the county. Well for them. It would just be a holding period for the most part.

1:26:23He would still come back to the PC for a recommendation, yes.

1:26:26Correct. So was there any action needed by us at all?

1:26:32Right to

1:26:34the right-of-way.

1:26:35So I guess in theory have to take action on this

1:26:43There's a there's an application before you that you have to act on. You have to either Agree with staff's recommendation of denial, continue it or approv or go against staff recommendation.

1:26:59Yeah, yeah. A fact.

1:27:04Work.

1:27:05No. The board could still initiate because it's a different application. But

1:27:09there's

1:27:10no

1:27:10negative consequence for the app.

1:27:13No, because the the the initiation would be a different application. It would be on the entire area.

1:27:23Option would be to continue this.

1:27:25The board could initiate a rezoning and then this act item could be withdrawn.

1:27:31That is an option too, you could just continue.

1:27:35If we continue the item, would we have to bring this specifically to the board for approval?

1:27:45I mean so

1:27:45one advantage of continuing it would be that if for some reason The board fails to initiate something.

1:27:53then you have the option of moving this forward.

1:27:59Sounds like a lot of things.

1:28:05Approval for a staff initiated rezoning on the specific parcels.

1:28:15Again, the the original recommendations were not of the original confident only can't follow the words, right?

1:28:22Correct. It would be an in

1:28:25recommend that it does get approved.

1:28:29on the condition or initiated. Okay.

1:28:39Yeah.

1:28:42Board initiated reasoning of the other ones anyway.

1:28:46Perhaps the recommendation can do both. So the recommendation would be to approve this and then ask the board to uh authorize uh companion rezoning. Correct. Something along those lines.

1:29:06We don't want 'em to have to pay more money, so

1:29:10Was that your motion, Matt?

1:29:11Be clear, a board initiative rezoning would not require them to pay with more money because it would be board initiative.

1:29:16Okay.

1:29:17But um but I get your point.

1:29:20Well when I say p initiate m pay more money, I'm talking about John's comments about the subdivision and so forth. So they really are only divided into two. And have it in the right-

1:29:32I think John's comments were sort of unrelated to the rezoning. Right. Correct. Comments more have more to do with how many lots they'd elect to After it's rezoning. After it's rezoning.

1:29:48also.

1:29:49I think so. I second. Could

1:29:52we please restate that?

1:29:53Yeah, can we restate the motion? And help me out if I uh the Help you out. The motion is to recommend approval of the rezoning to the board.

1:30:07With uh board,

1:30:09it's the board initiating a zoning of the additional parcels.

1:30:15Move the remove the con the restriction.

1:30:21Yeah, still second.

1:30:23Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion on the motion?

1:30:30If not all in favor, signify by saying aye.

1:30:32Aye. Aye.

1:30:33Close the like sign. Okay. There we go.

1:30:42Take a break, bathroom.