Zoning Amendment (Regular) - Mitchell 41 MPUD/James & Dorothy Mitchell Investments LTD - Rezoning Request from an A-C Agricultural District to an MPUD Master Planned Unit Development to Allow for the Development of 2,100 Residential Dwelling Units (Townhomes, Multi-Family Apartments, Single Family Detached), 880,000 Square Feet of Light Industrial, 99,000 square feet of Office and associated infrastructure - Northwest Pasco County - West Side of U.S. Highway 41 and North of Goodman Drive - Containing Approximately 1,219 Acres

2:18:34All right, to the board. No approval. Second. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. We need to. Okay, that takes care of the consent. We'll go to P93.

2:18:45All right, so P ninety three was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times April first, twenty twenty six and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

2:19:01I'm done at the thing.

2:19:11Oh good.

2:19:12Good afternoon, Wayne Vermillion, Planning, Development, Economic Growth. Somebody appears to have put my uh clicker in their pocket when they left.

2:19:23People might

2:19:24have

2:19:24found who that is.

2:19:26I could have done it telepathically, but I didn't want to show off like that. This is the uh this is the companion zoning amendment to the to the previously approved CPA on the the ordinance section of the agenda. This is Mitchell forty one M Pew D.

2:19:42What now?

2:19:44This is a rezoning from AC agricultural to MPUD master plan unit development for the total of 2100 residential dwelling units, 880,000 square feet of light industrial, 99,000 square feet of office and associated infrastructure on roughly. twelve hundred and nineteen acres. This is located in northwest Pasco County on the west side of US 41, just north of the intersection with 52.

2:20:14Here's the location map within the county. the current aerial you can see Cruise Lake and US forty one there.

2:20:26The existing zoning reflecting agricultural The current future land use map, look it looks like a a hodgepodge, but back in two thousand eight each individual wetland had a had a con flue placed over it, which is why you see all that dotted areas of con. You can see some I L and uh some all the old office flu.

2:20:49context map of the subject site there in blue. You can see US forty one as well as the CSX Railroad which runs through the uh the area of what we called Pinellas County for the for the water. And then you can see the Starkey to crossbar ecological corridor in yellow as well as in red. The already acquired Elamp property and Cruise Lake Park there in pink.

2:21:18So a couple different things to discuss on the master plan that are that are pretty good planning thought. The first being that 98% of the on-site wetlands are being preserved by the applicant there in green. It's actually 98.6% just north of that. And even bigger than that, there's two areas specifically called out for tree preservation. Staff went out with the applicant with natural resources, the county arborist, and looked at

2:21:48the on-site oak canopies that exist. And this was well before the county adopted the tree ordinance. And uh the applicant and staff were able to work together to come up with two different preservation areas. totaling roughly 47% of the on-site trees being preserved as a part of this application. You can see there in yellow that's the largely residential area. and in red the non residential area. As we move forward into the MPD connectivity

2:22:18plan, which gives us more detail than the master plan gave, the first things that are easy to point out is as big wins for the project outside of the tree preservation areas, both in the northwest corner and central to that roundabout. Is the trail that runs through the Starkey crossbar. The first segment there is in blue, and the second segment in yellow, which takes you to the trailhead within the tree preservation area on that northwest portion. all the way to the

2:22:48center north of the property, the blue being the responsibility of the county to construct and the orange being the responsibility of the developer.

2:23:00You can see also in in blue there the applicant is reserving a school site.

2:23:08And then there's also, additionally, there's multi-use paths throughout the project outside of that trail segment that runs through the Starkey crossbar, both along uh roads A and C, which are the two access points to State Road 41, the southern of which is a four-lane, the northern of which to serve the non-residential is a two-lane, as it uh meanders through the property.

2:23:31Another good thing to point out here is, you know, as the county and FDOT prepare for the four-lane widening of 41, which is contemplated in the long-range transportation plan and the cost-affordable plan, what staff did is work with the applicant to go ahead and acquire all the rot all the right-of-way necessary for the ultimate 220-foot. Forelaning of 41 on the applicant side because if I was to go over here back to the master plan, if you look on the

2:24:01opposite side of 41, it's a bunch of tiny little single family parcels, and it would have taken the county a long time to go through the imminent domain process to get all that right away for 41. So what we've done here is be able to speed up the process with the help of the applicant to get the right-of-way dedication from the west side of the road in this case.

2:24:23On the connectivity plan, we do have the typical sections, which highlights the 10-foot multi-use paths that are going to be going on both sides of the road. Whenever this project came in, the board will remember the typical section for the county up at that time was a 12-foot multi-use path, a five-foot sidewalk, and a bike lane. And before that was adopted, the applicant worked with staff to go ahead and implement the two ten-foot multi-use pads on either side of the road and eliminate the bike only to decrease

2:24:54some of the conflict that happens with pedestrians.

2:24:56Is the applicant putting a ten foot path in front of the property?

2:25:00On forty one. We have the right-of-way for um the F Dot typical section. Uh if the board remembers when the Mosquito property came in, we had a conversation about the pedestrian facilities on US forty one and F DOT is currently redoing their designs because of the old PD and E working with the county and the county engineer. Um that we have the right-way to accomplish a 10 or a 12-foot multi-use path, which the county's trying to get on both sides of the road.

2:25:27Right. And I'm not worried about the other side of the road, but with all these homes coming in, we need at least their side of the road, I would think, done.

2:25:33Absolutely, and that makes a lot of sense considering uh we're also doing a transit stop. on the uh along forty one with this property that the multi-use path would make sense to work with. Yes sir.

2:25:43It would be interesting if we could get an equestrian path along one of the sides because this area's big equestrian area and gonna grow into a bigger equestrian area.

2:25:56Certainly and I I think the last thing to highlight as a part of the connectivity plan is the maintenance easement that's shown there on the bottom. There's two different access points for our parks and rec and natural resource folks to be able to get into what is going to be a hundred and eighty acres of acquisition that the county that the count Let see, let me back up here.

2:26:20So essentially. That area in yellow outside of the subject site, it was a part of the original sub-area. It was all under the same ownership, but what the county's doing as a with the parks and rec and purchasing, about 180 acres of purchasing that land where that trail's gonna go. Um, and two access easements for the county to be able to get in there and maintain that. And a a good use of the land with the the passive trails going in for the public to use for

2:26:52This is just highlighting the uh the land use equivalency matrix, showing the board that there's no non residential conversions to residential and that as a part of this, um, I think that Clark touched on this before. The original mandate of the sub-area policy was to have north of 900 multifamily apartments. As a part of this, this is capped at 600. So not only it's a 300-plus dwelling unit reduction of what would have been required under

2:27:23the current 2008 approval, as well as capping the townhomes there under at 500, but still giving the applicant the option to do fully single family detach in this area at the 2100, as well as the industrial, office, and retail components that we that we saw on red.

2:27:44There are three different variations from the code, the first being 901611 street access to adjoining property.

2:27:57The applicant cannot connect as we move to the west. That's a part of that that ELAMP property that the county's acquiring, but they are providing connections to 41, to the south, and to the north of the subject site in compliance with the land development code. The second variation being from 8056 restrictions on post-development wetlands and upland buffers. This is for uh parcels under single ownership, only for commercial or multifamily to maintain their own common areas instead of establishing

2:28:27a C D D or an HOA. And finally from uh LDC table 9013A, which is the amount of access points per ERU or estimated residential unit. Typically the code requires two access points once you get north of 600 dwelling units. In this case, this variation is for the four-laning of the southern access prior to be able to serve units up to 1200 before constructing the additional road. So the same volume capacity is being preserved.

2:28:58by constructing Road C up front as a four lane road, as two accesses would have been required by the Code. Given that the Planning Development Economic Growth and the County Engineer are in support of the variation from Table 9013A. This comes with a recommendation of approval from PDE and the Planning Commission with conditions, and I'm available for any questions.

2:29:21Any questions?

2:29:23Chair. So

2:29:25under the existing or staff or Mr. Hobby We're redu so this project today we're reducing multifamily by how many units? Three hundred and what? This

2:29:36is Clark Hobby for the record again. It's uh it would be a minimum of three hundred and thirty-four, but it's likely to be much, much more, Commissioner. I mean right now we're not even planning for any apartments on the project, and it's really intended uh I'll have a large Discussion, but this project, this if I might just get into my presentation in chief. So I'm here on behalf of the Mitchell family and their entities and West Bay Homes, who's the contract purchaser. We have been

2:30:06working for four years with county staff on this. Four.

2:30:20Making sure the eco-corridor conveyance is going to occur and when this MPUD gets approved, that will trigger the purchase and sale of the eco-corridor provisions and that contract will be coming to you all in about a month or so. And hopefully the closing will occur maybe in you know a month or so after that. But the project has had a great deal of care from the West Bay uh Planning Team, the folks uh with our engineering folks

2:30:50at Clearview Land Design. I will give the county staff great credit on this one. When we got the first round of comments, the county staff said to us, We're having a problem with people taking down too many trees throughout uh the county and part of the development project. projects that we see. Can you guys help? So what happened was our whole team worked together and spent countless hours to design this project. To take advantage

2:31:21of this beautiful ranch that I grew up fishing on. My grandfather fished out there for many, many years with a Wolf family that used to own it. And we preserved a significant amount of oak trees on the site, and we're using them as our entry feature and many other amenities throughout the site. We're also building a four-lane boulevard. entrance that goes around and a big roundabout around the trees. So again, we're taking advantage of what nature's giving

2:31:51us and we're not trying to nuke a bunch of wetlands either. Again, we're we're the project's designed to create creations to the Morsani track and the eco-corridors that lie to our west and to our north. There are folks who use the Mazaruktown uh canal, which is to the north, to ride horses. And so we've had our team out, they've been riding, brought horses out to the site, and we're trying to connect create connections through Morsani so that our residents can have an equestrian

2:32:21usage to also get out to the the banks of the uh Mazaruktown uh canal and use it the way that existing residents are. The the lot of discussion about densities on this thing, but I would remind the board it's a large piece of property. It's basically 1400 acres before the eco corridor uh transaction occurs. Even with all we're doing today The net density is less than 2.5 units per acre, and

2:32:51that's because West Bay's intent is not to jam as much density on there, but to build a high-end community that does the things that this has always been planned for. And it's instructive to go back and read the comp plan because about the same time that Dewey and I first started working on this project. Yeah. The county went through a visioning process for the whole county and part of it was the creation of the central market area which includes this area. And

2:33:22the central market area is envisioned as a suburban area with concentrated development and activity nodes with emphasis on employment centers and town centers. And the comp plan specifically says that the area north of 52 between 41 and the Sun Coast shall encourage development in that area. and that the development shall be in a form with mixed-use land uses and nodes or clusters that promote higher density integrated with employment retail and mutually supportive

2:33:52uses. That is what you are seeing here. We have increased the amount of acreage for the employment on this site. We have provided in the MPUD conditions for the provision of the infrastructure for the employment. We've provided for a school site, we've provided for the retail areas, and we're making a great mixed-use community. So this is one people can talk about Pasco County being overdeveloped, but this is a community we're going to be very proud of for generations,

2:34:23and I stand behind it a hundred percent. Thank you.

2:34:27Um Clark, can you go to the next screen? We don't have these in our packet, any of these.

2:34:32You don't have what in our packet?

2:34:33Any of these pictures. So this one um

2:34:36Yeah on the connectivity plan. Oh let me yield I'm sorry, let me let me speak to that. Uh I was just speaking with Mr. Henry, our transportation engineer, before I came up here. They just had a meeting with DOT that on the uh frontage and the sidewalk and multi-use path, the chairman and Commissioner Starkey.

2:34:55Right now, uh we just had a meeting with DOT recently and they agreed that if they approve of it, we will be able to install and we will install a 10 foot multi-use uh trail on our side along the front edge. So we just have to get DOT's approval for it.

2:35:12And we worked um a lot to uh work on this trail. That is on the back side of this. That is going up. Uh th up the wildlife corridor on the edge. And they're all that gets you from fifty-two. up to cross bar and albar and or uh I gu no, I guess it gets you to Cruise Lake and whatever's above here.

2:35:38Yeah, that's that's going into the Cruise Lake and the Eco Corridor. But uh again, a lot of work went into this with staff um and a lot of departments and there was a lot of give and take with the developer. At first we were worried about having, you know, maybe too much of the public if this will come on.

2:35:59Try it again. The blue. Where the blue is. We were worried about having high-end homes out in some of these areas and having maybe a little bit too much members of the public out there, but I think our client finally found that that really wasn't going to be an issue and having the ability to get out in this huge eco-corridor that the county's already spent millions and millions of dollars of creating over time and getting through the Moorshani track is more. of an amenity to the community that we're going to build than a hindrance

2:36:29to the people who will be the homeowners on that side.

2:36:32And we have an equestrian facility that we're working on on the other side of the wildlife corridor. Our entrance comes in off the other side. But it's going to be great for these residents who, if they market to an equestrian community. And I want to thank um Mr. Suggs, Mr. Matheny and um And Jordan came on a different trip. We don't have toxie out on a bike yet, out on Starkey Ranch. Um But they're the I think Jordan was on my second tour.

2:37:02Um, but I've been taking developers and engineers Uh done three now uh for bike rides out on Starkey to see how the trails work and integrate within the community and I just appreciate you guys riding with me. And um I think we had a nice ride. So

2:37:18we'll wait for public comment and answer any other questions you may have. Uh

2:37:21I want to I I I appreciate what you just said at the end there that covered my my biggest point, so that was cool. Thank you.

2:37:26Thanks, sir.

2:37:26All right, time for public comment. We have one person signed up.

2:37:29Michaela Krauss.

2:37:33Michaela Krause, [address removed]. I have sworn. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I am here today to urge this board to deny the rezoning request for the Mitchell 41. MPUD. I find great inconsistency with the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan. This development is completely incompatible with Northwest Pasco's environment and directly violates County's core com

2:38:04Con um com comf Saving the land. Conver yep, policies. Um first this proposal contradicts Chapter 2, Policy 2.2.1.6. Second, it directly violates Chapter 5, Policy 1.9.1. This massive track serves as a critical wildlife corridor. It cannot simply be replaced or mitigated away once fragmented. Third, this intense overdevelopment. Severely undermines PolicyCon 1.6.17.

2:38:37Running completely counter to the county's mandate to safeguard our vital water resources and regional hydrology. This local disregard for environmental boundaries also directly conflicts with state intent under Florida Statute Section 379.2291 and Florida Administrative Code Rule 688. A-27. Commissioner, your legal responsibility is to ensure that comprehensive plan amendments

2:39:08remain consistent with our adopted conservation goals. Please deny this rezoning request. Thank you.

2:39:17Anyone else like to address P ninety three?

2:39:22Anyone online?

2:39:23Um no. Yes, please. Gabriel Quigley, [address removed].

2:39:31And you've been sworn?

2:39:33Do I need to?

2:39:35This part of the agenda you had need to be swarm. Do you think that's right?

2:39:38Right. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give? Is the truth so help you God?

2:39:41So help me God, yes. I'm just gonna keep it quick for you guys. When I said that the re the land brokers and the developers and the retail companies are out of control, this is what I was talking about. These are the people who are coming to you asking you for an excuse for permission to make more money. They don't deserve it, frankly. I don't think any of 'em do. We have enough of this in Pasco County. We don't need to sell off every

2:40:11piece of empty land just because it is empty. I've lived here my entire life. These people are sharks. Thank you.

2:40:21Okay. Anyone else from from the audience like to speak? I have a close close public comment because there's no one online either. That's to the board.

2:40:31Oh. No, I just want to state that this is a state transmittal and um essentially the board is seeking the state's input prior to the hearing of the comprehensive plan it's the other one?

2:40:43This is the next one. This is on the

2:40:46There's ninety three. Rezoning.

2:40:49Oh it's not this one, sorry. Okay, so we have a first

2:40:53we have a motion.

2:40:53Motion, a second. Did you have to do that?

2:40:56I'm second,

2:40:57yeah. Okay. All right. We have a motion and second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. And now we'll go to the comprehensive plan regular. All right.

2:41:06So