PC5 Campbell rezoning RMH single-family detached homes
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Planning Commission, Jul 9, 2020
The published PDF. Its text could not be extracted — it is an image-only scan — so nothing in it is searchable here, but it reads normally.
The county’s minutes for Planning Commission, Jul 9, 2020
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 51m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 81% of 255 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
We will now move on to item PC5 and I'm going to bring that PowerPoint up on the item and this will be um uh presented by Christina Costa. We do have applicants here and the applicant team on that is um are Cindy Tarrapani, Lori Katzman, Paul Skidmore, and Ms. Peggy Campbell. We also have some public comment. One, two, three, four. a team of about six percent
of folks
just leave it a crack in case he wants to get back.
There's a team of public commenters also on WebEx as well on this item. So I am going to bring up the presentation. If you give me a second.
And uh Christina Casa will be presenting the item.
Hi again, Christina Acosta from Planning and Development. Item P five. is item PDD 20-7489 for a change in zoning from C2, General Commercial District, to RMH, Mobile Home District, in the name of Truman D and Margaret G. Campbell and Truman Don Campbell, Revocable Trust.
Located on the east side of US 41, approximately half a mile north of State Road 52.
The subject site is undeveloped and contains approximately forty-three point nine acres. The applicants proposed to rezone the property in order to develop the site with a single family detached subdivision in conformance with RMH Mobile Home District standards for development. The applicant has voluntarily agreed to record a deed restriction limiting the site to a maximum of 120 single-family detached dwelling units and prohibiting mobile and manufactured homes. The deed restriction has been executed and will be filed with the county upon final approval with the BCC.
The surrounding area is characterized by residential development, entitled commercial parcels, and agricultural pursuits. The subject area has a future land use classification of retail office residential under the comprehensive plan, and a singular use on the site is permitted due to the mix of uses in the ROR corridor. The subject site is approximately 14% of the total ROR corridor.
And here is a look at the property and its surrounding zoning.
And the future land use corridor.
and an overall area of the site. This comes to you with a recommendation of approval, and I am here for any questions.
Uh Christina.
Mm-hmm.
Just clarify clarify something for me. We're asking for a rezoning. To R one M H, is that right? Yeah. R M.
To R M H, yep. Uh but single family homes are permitted in this district.
What is
it The single family homes are permitted in this district and the applicant has recorded a deed restriction. that will prohibit mobile or manufactured homes. So they're building a single family subdivision. No mobile homes.
Okay, so they're gonna be site built homes.
Site Bill Holmes.
All right. I just I w for some reason I had it in my mind that RMH was designed for mobile homes. I mean
that's that's a correct statement, Mr. Chairman Denise Hernandez planning and development. So you're correct. RMH historically has been a um a a a zoning district that is for mobile homes or um modular homes. Um what occurred is in 2017, 2018 or so, uh we had a few projects Over on the west side of the county that were zoned RMH. And there was an area of land that was going to be acquired by Habitat for Humanity, and
they wanted to build site-built homes specifically. So the Board of County Commissioners directed the Planning and Development Department to make modifications to the RMH district because it made no sense. For RMH to only have mobile homes. So I and I do understand that we probably should change the name of the district. But in this case, this applicant has voluntarily agreed to record a deed restriction that prohibits mobile and manufactured homes. It's going to be for single family
detached homes only. It's uh basically they're on 40-foot lots. So this is kind of like a way to as long as they remain within the density or the less density to not go through the have to go. or mandate the master plan unit development district process. And uh there is a a team on here to uh to speak on the item. And um, if we can um, of course, please entertain other any other questions from the from
the uh from the planning commission members. But I just wanted to let you know that there's a team here, uh Peggy Campbell, Paul Skidmore, Lori Katzman, and Cindy Terrapani. And there's also Mr. Richard Budd, Alita Budd, Julie Albers, Matthew Wallace, Mark Bud, and Mark Twafhoven also on WebEx to speak on the item. We're not sure if it's opposition, but they do have public comment that would they would like to
provide on the item.
Okay. Um, I want to uh ask something about lot size, but uh Christina, I don't have to ask you. I could ask, you know, Mr. Penny or somebody like that, whatever's. Whoever he feels appropriate. I'm just With a forty foot lot size, are they contemplating Like the garden patio style home where they're sort of semi attached or How how is that?
I'm
trying to figure out how it's gonna look or how it's gonna play.
Well, as far as how the homes themselves will will look, I would have to defer to the applicant, but they are stating that the homes will be single family detached. So not townhomes, not villas, but on their own, on their own lots.
Okay, and what are the setbacks on that type of property?
So for RMH, the setbacks would be 20 or 15, depending if it's in a subdivision, it would be 20, five foot side, and the rear would be five.
So nothing w we couldn't build anything wider than thirty feet.
If you decide to use 40 foot homes, we can or 40 foot wide lots. We can ask um Ms. Terrapanny and her team and see what they're they're proposing.
All right. Christina, you're off the hot seat.
Okay. Uh Ms. Terra Panny, is she available there?
Um So uh Cindy Terrapani, Paul Skidmore, Lori Katzman on this item. Um, we would like to for you to be sworn in for the record. And when you speak, please state, when you're going to be speaking, please state your name and your address for the record as well. So we'll swear you in first.
All right, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth to help you God?
I did.
Thank you. Thank you. And uh Ms. Terra Panny, do you want to uh provide um answer the questions that the chairman had? Um, or do you want to answer that question and then perhaps um let the folks that are here for public comment comment so that then you can answer those questions?
Mr. Chairman, this is Cindy Terrapani. I represent the applicant, the owners of the property, Truman and Margaret Campbell. I'm hoping you can hear me okay. If not, please say so.
No, I can hear you just fine. And if you want to wait to answer uh my questions at the end, you can do that too. Whatever it's best.
I can answer it right away and then I do have a brief presentation and then I'm happy to answer questions from the board and from any of the uh surrounding neighbors. Um first of all, uh we do plan to do single family detached um the size of the home.
Cindy, I'm sorry to interrupt you. Would you state your name and your address for the record so the clerk can pick that up, please?
Sure. Good afternoon. I'm Cindy Terrapani with Terrapani Planning Strategies. My business address is 128 East Tarpon Avenue in Tarpon Springs, Florida. And as I said, I represent the property owners, Truman and Margaret Campbell, and also the contract purchasers. And to answer Mr. Gray's question, we plan to build single-family detached homes on a 40-foot lot. That means with five-foot setback on either side, that would be a maximum width of a product of 30
feet. And that is what we're proposing to build in this development. Um Let me just uh back up a little bit and tell you a little more about why how we got to this uh application. Um the site is currently zone C2, general commercial, um, on the entire 43 acres. And although, as your staff has stated, the RMH does allow both mobile homes and single family detached, the property owners have signed a deed restriction and we provided that to the county that prohibits mobile homes on the site. and
would limit the site to a maximum of 120 lots. We'll probably be somewhat less than that, but that's the absolute maximum according to the deed restriction. If the rezoning is approved by the commission, we will record that deed restriction and of course be bound by it. In addition to limiting the number of units on the site to a maximum of 120, it's also a significant downzoning that really significantly decreases the amount of development on the site. From six about 630,000 square feet of commercial development could be accommodated on the
site. So this rezoning would eliminate the ability for any commercial commercial uses on the property. This area of 41, just north of 52, is rapidly developing with residential uses. The Talaver MPD on the west side of 41 is aligned, its southern border is aligned with our northern border. It was approved in 2004 for 840 homes, and many of those homes have been built and they continue to be under construction. To the east of our site is the Pilot Country Estates, also a residential neighborhood
with an airport. It should be noted that our east property line adjacent to Pilot Country has two large wetlands that will form a natural buffer between this site, the rezoning site, and the pilot country homes. Additionally, there are only four homes in pilot country estates immediately adjacent to the residential site. And again, between those homes and the rezoning site is this wetland, which will serve as a buffer. The other thing I would note is the closest home location
on this rezoning site to the runway will be about 850 feet. And the closest that a home would be to the closest home in pilot country estates is about 350 feet and it ranges up to 750 feet separation. And we are aware that this review, uh the FAA review is required. We've already submitted for their review and approval. And we also propose to include a disclosure in our sales contract to advise future owners of the pilot
country airport in proximity to the site. The site has sewer and water utilities available to it today. There will be a negligible traffic impact for the project as compared to the commercial development that could have been built here under the commercial C2 zoning. And this site requests residential zoning as exists to the east, the southwest, and the northwest. And additionally immediately to the north is the R1 MH zoning district. In summary, this rezoning for residential development is compatible with surrounding
residential development and meets all the Land Development Code criteria for approval. Your staff has recommended approval, as Ms. Hernandez stated, due to the small size of the property and the fact that there is only one use on the property of residential and only one type of residential use that the MPD seems like an overkill to use that to employ that technique for this site. Respectfully request approval of your rezoning and I'll be happy to answer your questions and reserve some time at the end. And for response to any any
uh concerns from the neighbors, um, if there are any. Thank you so much.
Any of the uh interfeating question I have is um I have some concern about the fact that uh you're right next to pilot country. What I would hate to see is for us to allow development to go in there and then have them raise issues about there being an airport next to them and then Uh because I think Yeah, they're there. We don't want They're already there. So I don't wanna I don't wanna create a
problem for for the pilot country people either. So uh I don't know what your w you know, if if you thought about that or if you talked to Pilot Country or I don't even know if some of the people are gonna speak are from pilot country, but That's a concern I would have. I I don't wanna Put them in a situation where they're Under the gun there.
Sure. If I could respond briefly and then I'm sure if there's someone here from them, they can speak for themselves too. But what we plan to do proactively is in our sales contracts have a disclosure that states that there is an airport and specifically name the pilot country airport located on State Road 52, include the address of the airport. And also I would suspect that many people as they drive to the site to look at the property um are going to see that airport as they drive on 52 but regardless we will include a disclosure in
all these sales contracts that says um that notes the proximity of the pilot country airport to the site where the homes will be built. We think that We let people know in advance that that's a good solution. I'd also note that there are residential homes in this area. in the flight path, Tel Avere is in the flight path as well. And quite frankly, development is moving north along this section of 41. So this is probably not the only case that you'll see with this this issue come up. We are respectful of
pirate country estates and their existing business and airport, and that's why we proposed the disclosure.
All right, good. I'm glad you've thought that through. Um Any other questions from the dais for Mr.
Um Big question for you, and I know you you mentioned a couple of times in your presentation that residential development continues to push north on 41. Um, as I look at the map of all the development out there, though, are there other developments that are 40 foot lots? Everything I've seen in that area is sixty foot lots plus. I mean you look at a pile of country obviously on the other side of the wetland, they're acre lots. Um the development other side of 41's all 60 foot lots or six square feet. I mean, it seems like it's
pretty small lots for this area of the county.
Um, you do have um some 60-foot lots in Talavera, um, and we recognize that the the 40-foot lots is a is a smaller lot, but quite frankly is just responding to the market um of what is being demanded in the market, and that's what we're responding to. So that's why we propose the 40-foot lot. Again, the there is R1MH to the immediate north of this property. It's undeveloped at this time, but it does has the have the R1MH zoning district.
Yeah, but the minimum lot size in R one M H is twenty thousand square foot, isn't it?
Twenty thousand.
I'm sorry, I I wasn't aware of that. Wasn't sure of the size.
Yeah, 20 uh R1 MH zoning by definition is a 20,000 square foot lot. R1 MH.
Yeah, that's the main thing that gives me heartburn on this as far as R1 MH goes. I mean, as far as RMH goes, is it just this these lots just seem awful small, that's all.
Yeah. Um Sara Penny for Pas
Yeah.
Your microphone's in on
Chuck. Sandy, can you hear me now?
I can, yes sir.
No, I'm just trying to to create a picture in my mind of what it would look like. Uh Are they thinking about doing something like they did out in Longleaf with the narrow homes and the two story or is it something that?
My my the client who is the contract purchase of the property is not the ultimate developer. There will, but we do we do expect that there would be some two-story homes on this property in addition to the one-story home. So a mix of both.
Okay.
All right, anybody else have questions? If if not, then uh we'll hear from the other.
Yes, Mr. Chair, we do have um some some um commenters signed up on WebEx, and at least two of those do represent the pilot country estates uh homeowners association, and at least one of those uh does represent the air the pilot country is pilot country area. Um if we can um
Richard Budd is not on, but I do have Alita Bud uh ready to go.
Okay.
Ms. Alita Budd, um would you please uh prov please um provide your name and address for the record? And if you would please be sworn in.
Sure, my name is Alita Budd. Um my address is uh [address removed].
Can you please raise your right hand?
Sure.
Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you God?
Yes. Thank you. Ms. Bud, your three minutes will start now. Thank you. Thank you. Is everybody
able to hear me?
We hear you
perfect. Great. Thank you so much. So I'm hoping that you will not approve this rezoning. We've lived here for 21 years. Um and over the past few years, as you've said before, the growth here has developed uh very quickly. And so we are um getting more and more noise complaints as our airplanes take off and land. Now we are a 24-hour airport, but
we do not have airplanes that take off at four in the morning unless there's an emergency or somebody is scheduled to take out. And we do have people that landed in the evening. Um one of our concerns um Is Uh as Um the lady had spoken earlier, she had said that there were going to be a stipulation in For the homeowners to understand that they were building next to an airport. While I understand there's wetlands that are the buffer, it's the air that is not the buffer.
So we have pu people that complain that airplanes are making flying over their head and they're doing it illegally. And this land is in our flight pattern. So that is one of our concerns. We also have concerns with the environmental. Are these whole bus going to be on a well. Um, what is um
the water runoff that will be affecting us here. And furthermore, we're one of only three airports in Pasco County and to have this kind of development out here, we are very concerned with more and more noise companies.
Ms. Bud, is that your the end of your comment?
Miss Bud?
Showing
up on the
screen. Ms.
Bud,
I do believe that is the end of her comment. She muted herself.
Okay. Okay, uh thank you for your comment, Ms. Bud.
Um is I also have signed up to speak on this item, Julie Aubers.
Yeah, she is now available.
Okay. Ms. Albers, would you please uh state your name and address for the record and the clerk will score you? Of
Julie Albers, [address removed].
Can you please raise your right
hand? Um yes. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is of the truth to help you cannot?
I do. Thank you.
Um my question is what's to stop the builder from changing the deed restrictions allow mobile or um to have homes. What do you think?
Oh and then also um what square foot are the homes? Are they gonna Five thirty then.
And I don't think um Talavera is in the flight path.
Thank you.
I heard about the need restrictions. What was the other two?
Um what is the square footage of the homes? Is it 20 by 30 feet? If you do the math, that's what it appears to be. And then also I just wanted to state that I don't think Telavera is in the flight pack of the airport.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you for your questions. Um Cindy, do you does your team want to address Those questions? And I think maybe David is chiming in probably about the deed restriction.
Well, just the deed restriction would require the applicant to go back through the zoning process to have the board release the deed restriction. So Did effectively require a new rezoning to have the deed restriction released. In fact, there's another item on the agenda today where that's exactly what's happening.
Uh
All right. And um maybe should we wait till we hear all the objectors before we address them?
Absolutely, Mr. Chair, if that's your pleasure. Absolutely. Um, following person I have signed up on this item is Matthew Wallace. Is Matthew Wallace on?
Yes, he is.
Um, Mr. Wallace, would you please provide your full name for the record and your address and then wait to be sworn in by the clerk? Thank you.
Matthew, we need your full name and address, please.
Matthew, are you still there?
Mr. Wallace, try unmuting your phone or whatever device that you're on. You're unmuted on our side.
Well let's go to the next person then and see.
Okay, we'll move on to the next person. Um I have
Go ahead, please. Mr. Wallace. Okay, we'll go on to um Mark Twelfhoven. Um are you on, sir?
Mark Twolfhoven.
He's on
now.
Yes, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Please.
My name is Mark Twelfhoven. I live on [address removed] at the airport. Besides being a resident, I'm also the owner of the airport. I am also joined here due to difficulties to connect by three additional residents, one of which has lived 40 plus years. on the airport and the other gentleman 15 years on the airport. I'm okay to be sworn in out.
Okay, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth to help you God?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Um, I need to disclose that I have searched to have contact with the developer. I've met with the developer and I've expressed my concerns also to the developer. The first observation is that this is a public-use Federal Aviation Administration, an FAA-approved airport in Pasco County. We go by the name of Pilot Country Airport. Port X05 is our ticker. We get inspected on a yearly basis by FDOT.
We have reviews and compliances to be made, and we are open to the public, not just for Florida, but for the general public in the United States. We are basically concerned about the impact to noise abatement as we have had complaints increase recently. The airport communities are parcels of one acre. We have s asked or requested the developer to see if they would maybe consider. Um,
being uh larger parcels, then at least we don't have that density. We also had recently in December of last year, the state of Florida, FDOT, do an economic development assessment of the value of airports to the community. So there is a statewide economic impact study that was recently done. Also listed our airport. And we also have concerns about what we call the use
zoneage that goes around airports. So there has been a lot of discussion in the United States about what I would call the guidelines for land use and compatibility for airports. So our concern is not so much about That people want to develop or they want to develop homes. The concern is really for us that it is in compliance with the use of an airport. We are very concerned. about this small airport.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments, sir. You stated that you have some Other folks there with you that want to provide comment as well?
Yes, I will let the gentleman who has been resident 47 years here speak. Go ahead.
My name is Robert Garcia. I live [address removed]. And like he said, I've been here for over 42 years. My biggest concern is the watershed.
Sir, please. Um we need to have you uh sworn in by the clerk. Thank you, sir.
Please raise your right your right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so helpy God?
I do.
Thank you.
My biggest concern, um my home is right behind this property. So my biggest concern is the watershed. Uh one of the problems we have a Pala County is that it floods in in the rainy season. And all the water goes into that watershed that they're going to be working around. So the question that keeps coming up in my mind, how are we going to be able to work in the future if that water flow gets some sort of problems because of that construction? The second item that I have is the size of the
homes. Most of the homes are part of the country by the code, uh, frankly, it was a code that uh The um The first owner. developed was 2,000 square foot minimum per home. Okay. These homes on a forty. size acre uh of property. would not be that big. So what is that good, what's that gonna do to our prices for our homes, our value of our homes when we have something next door that is not as valuable?
And and you know, we're right now we're building a couple of homes in the neighborhood over one million dollars each. So what how are we going to be protected against something that is below the level that we got here?
Thank you.
Okay.
Did you also say there was another a third person there as well, Mr. Um Garcia or Dwalf.
The other two people have elected to not speak as we have addressed the concerns already. Thank you.
Thank you so much, sir. Okay, we'll now move to Mr. Mark Budd. Mr. Mark Budd, are you there?
Yes, I'm here.
Okay, would you please state your name and address for the record and uh wait to be sworn in?
Yes, uh it's Mark Budd, [address removed], Pilot Country Airport.
Please raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so helpy God?
I do.
Thank you.
Okay, my major concern is that the planned rezoning to residential is probably not uh compatible with the airport activities. and the future residents of the proposed area. So as uh Mark Pwilvin said, uh And uh Richard Garcia is uh or Robert Garcia. This airport's been around for over 40 years since the early 1970s. It is a uh public use transportation airport.
Uh there are guidelines online for uh land use compatibility zones. uh for airports and one example is uh From uh Shelton, Washington, that I that I found. And the purpose of these uh guidelines are to minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards that will result from incompatible. Land use development around airports. And To protect airports
from potential encroachment by land uses that are not compatible. with airport activities that may impair the planned development and use of that airport. And I get concerned about this because If uh some of you might remember, there's an airport over in uh the Clearwater area, Clearwater Air Park. And it was there for a long time. And then the communities sprouted up around it. And soon they had a nightmare of a
problem with the communities trying to basically put them out of business. And uh and there were vandalism problems and All kinds of things going on that were very Bad for that airport. And uh I don't want to see something like that happen. Fire. And you talk about the uh the televerdi. Um the recent uh subdivision that That's
to the uh northwest of pilot country right now that sprung up over the last few years. Uh that is actually in uh the uh
Traffic pattern of the airport, and we do get noise complaints from them. And I understand that uh They were supposed to also have a sales disclosure. With respect to uh people coming in there about the airport operations and that this airport has been here a long time. And as far as I understand, that has not happened. So You know, I've I have that concern as well. Uh I I have a concern about the size of these uh
Um five. Thanks for me. dwellings and the density of the dwellings and that that is even command with the surrounding area. Uh Had lines of the land.
Mr. Budd, your time is up. Thank you very much for your comment.
The following person we have signed up to speak on this item is Mr. Matthew Wallace. Mr. Wallace, are you on?
Yeah. Can you hear me now?
Yes, Mr. Wallace, would you please provide your full name and your address for the record and the clerk will swear you in?
I'm sure thing. Apologies for the audio issues before. My name is Matthew Wallace. I've resided at [address removed], for the last 17 years.
Please raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth helpy God?
I do.
Thank you.
All right. I'm basically going to reiterate what most folks have said, but I want to stress, I I want to help stress the fact that we are concerned about this. Um everybody starts out with the best of intentions with these things, but What we decide on now doesn't necessarily dictate what happens in the future. People can sign a disclosure and move in and then they don't like the noise, so they're gonna complain about it. And uh we've seen encroachment in all the other airports around here over time. So I would encourage us in Pasco
to think long term and uh think wisely about how we do compatible zoning. Um, as you said, the the 2010 census said there were 228,000 households in Pasco. housing units, but we only have three airports. So, you know, we don't really have a housing issue. We have an airport issue. And as a very small minority, being three airports. I would just like you to keep that in mind. Uh basically I I have a question that this may be inconsistent zoning.
The Florida statutes 330 through 333 have talked about zoning near the airport, and I'm not sure that, you know, this may be a case there. The other issue is impairing the value of this asset. And I'm not just talking about economically. Mark Swalhoven talked about the economic aspect of it. But during disaster relief this airport is used for law enforcement, for medical purposes. Uh, when President Bush went for his re-election and he was driving a bus through Florida, his uh rapid response team parked their helicopter here.
So we provide a lot of value to this area beyond just trade economic value. And I'm also actually concerned for these up to 120 residents or families that would move in here. Uh, when you green light this, if you do, and I please hope that you don't, Uh it's it's you're helping the developer, but the resident is gonna move in, they're gonna settle in, and then they're gonna hear these airplanes. And even if they sign the disclosure, we can't control their response to that. So that's uh that's
my commentary here and I yield back any time I might have.
Okay, well thank you. Is there anyone else, uh Denise?
Um, I'm gonna try once again. I don't believe he's on, but I'm just gonna try once again for Richard Budd. Is Richard Bud on?
I do not see him, Denise.
Okay, thank you so much. Um, so that that was it.
Do we uh can we have the applicant back to respond to some of these uh
sure uh we can have Cindy Terrapani and her team, uh Paul Skidmore and Lori Katzman back on, please, to answer questions.
Thank you, Ms. Fernandez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. I think what you have here is what you all do with a lot, which is balancing property rights, the property rights of the applicants, the property owners, the Campbells, who have lived there for generations. And actually the Campbells sold the pilot country estate's property to that developer. So you're balancing the property rights of the Campbells and the and the developer of the site with other properties in the area. We are doing everything possible that we can to make our project compatible. For example, we
are not proposing any commercial uses, which which many people think is incompatible with residential. The entire project will be residential. The size of the lot and the value of the homes, the size of the lot and the value of the homes are really not relative to your discussion in terms of reducing property value. It's residential use next to residential use and not even right next to each other, but separated by a substantial buffer of the wetland between the two properties.
And then I would also say the trend generally, as you all know, and you've seen this, and you see this in all the major projects, the Conertons to the south of you, Cyprus Provert Preserve to the south of 52, all have 40-foot lots, as do many other projects in throughout Pasco County. The difference is that's a major MPD where they have a mix of lot sizes. This project is only 43 acres, so it didn't make sense to do an MPD and go through that process just for one land use type, which the staff had had supported.
With regard to meeting the FAA, we we have already applied to FAA to meet those requirements, and we will comply with whatever FAA's requirements are. And I would finally note two things in the documents that Mr. Twelfhaven provided. Number one, he provided me a traffic pattern depiction. I think it might have been in your packet as well. Within this, the traffic pattern is not just this small 45. Through acres, but also Pasco Trails to the east, Conerton south of 52, and the Talavera Subdivision
to the northwest. So, yes, development is coming to this part of Pasco County, and we're asking to balance that. And we're asking you to approve a residential use that will have less impact on all the surrounding area. We could have put almost 600,000 square feet of commercial. We chose not to do that. Residential is of better use. So again, we we are, I hope you won't penalize us for maybe Talavera's bad behavior. Um, if that's true, I really don't know. We I am telling you as um as a uh as the applicant
and as the representative of the developer that they will include a disclosure in their sell in their sales contract. Um, and people will be made aware of that issue. And then folks will decide if they want to live in the division or not it'll be entirely their choice just as it's their choice whether they live on a one acre lot a 500-acre lot or this within this project. That's why we have a variety of lot sizes and lot styles and residential styles because everyone has a slightly different goal as to where they want to live. And the
trend lately, as you all have noted, I'm sure you've seen it in many of your projects, Is to have uh less lot and less yard to mess around with, but a house that you can enjoy and maybe pool, but anyway, a smaller lot, but a nice house to enjoy. So I think um I would just respectfully ask for your approval. We're not doing anything different than is not found in the general area and is not found throughout Pasco County, and uh we do think. Think that residential use on this project, next
to the residential use of pilot country estates, is a compatible land use. Thank you very much.
Yeah, it's a reference to what?
Do we have any questions from the dais?
Anyway.
Yeah, I mean I I'm I I'm just still having a heartburn about the the 40 foot lots in the in in this area. I mean again it's on the north side of 52. Um I I don't know. I just think we're opening up Pandora's box and all these I mean everything up there uh on that corridor on forty one north of fifty two is gonna be coming in for these forty foot lots in the future.
I I I don't know. I mean, is there any I haven't seen the layout so I don't know. Maybe that's maximum 120, 40 foot lots on on the property. I I I don't know the answer to that, but I Again, I don't see this as a compatible use. And I think that, you know, as I look back at the criteria, you know, for the approval of the of the rezoning, and then the very consistent with the existing land use pattern in the area. I I don't see this as being consistent with the existing land use pattern in the area. Thank
you, Hudson.
Um I I would agree, Jamie. I'm struggling with that as well. I have no issue at all with houses going in. None at all. I just I struggle with that size lot as well there. Yeah. Like I said, I have no issue at all with houses going there. I think that's perfectly fine, but. Oh no, this seems small.
Yeah, one of the reasons that I ask about the style of the home is because typically One story. garden style homes are attractive to retirees. New story. Or attract or they tend to attract families. Yeah. I think you're a lot more likely to get objectors. If they're one story. And um Yeah, I'm just very Sensitive.
I saw what happened to West Pasco Airport. You know, and that was in my mind a shame that we let that get up get away from us, meaning the county. Um Because the economic impact of a of a Of an airport. Is Pretty wide. And uh pretty important you can See how it affects Brooksville, for example. Um
And And the problem is is that you if you s have somebody s sign an agreement saying that they understand there's an airport there, then they sell their house to the next person, they haven't signed that agreement. You know, I don't know how you insulate the airport from objectors. That's that's my pr problem and I I would just hate to see Uh something that's been there for forty years. uh, be run out of town, so to speak. Uh because we're we're Letting
the wrong type of development go adjacent to it. And I'm Yeah, I'm definitely a property rights person. I definitely I like to see people to be able to develop their property to highest and best use. But I also uh have to be concerned about people that are already there and already have their investment. And uh So Um I you know, I I'm sort of like you. Uh Uh in in terms of the development, I think development
is gonna be good there. I just don't know if this is uh This is the right kind of development. And uh
Yeah, I'd almost rather see offices there than than little houses. But uh Uh No. Any comment, Chris? No, I agree with everything that
everything that y'all said. There's nothing nothing further from me.
Uh uh What about uh Anybody else on the from the from the board would like to comment? Roberto, do you have any comment?
No, I think it's enough with what you have been mentioned and I can agree with the three of you.
Yeah, they uh I don't know, David uh Goldstein, I don't know if there's any way you can Mm-hmm. I can't see. Yeah.
I think uh
Yeah, um
That's it.
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
Hi Mr. Chair, I lost connection. I can't hear the chair.
Okay, can you hear me now?
I can hear you now. Go ahead.
Yeah. Uh, somebody in the background was talking. I don't know if there's any way to insulate the airport uh legally from future objections. I don't think what they've suggested is goes far enough. And I don't know if you can go far enough, but uh I I think it's imperative that we protect the airport. I think it's a valuable asset to wider, the broader Western West community. Yeah. I think last thing we need to do another airport.
Noise coming from
Okay. Did you hear me, David?
Yeah, I heard you. So uh the answer is it's very difficult to fully insulate another development from objections. The I mean if they put a D description that says that you're aware of it. Yes, that's evidence that you're aware of it, but we live in a country where people can speak all they want. I mean, so They can make a call to their commissioners, they can make calls to the FAA, they can make calls to whatever agency they want to. and and file complaints and there's nothing really We
can do to stop him. Yes, we can present the deed restriction or contract saying you knew about it. Fine. it still may force the pilot country to respond to the complaint. So The answer to your question is I think Aded restriction is some evidence that the owner had knowledge. when they moved in that it was going to be there, but it doesn't stop them from filing a complaint. Does that answer your question?
Yes, it it does, definitely.
Okay. Um
Kirk Penny, do you have any other suggestions along those lines?
Sandy, do you got can you hear me?
I'm alive. Yes. Can you hear me all now?
Yeah.
Okay, Sunday. Again, Cindy Terrapani. Um Again, and I I think we're doing the best that we possibly can with this disclosure. And I agree with Mr. Goldstein. Um, you know, someone gets that disclosure, it's included in their sales contract, they know what they're purchasing. Someone comes there and they see the airport and they decide they don't want to live next to that or in close proximity to that, then that's their choice. I would also point out under the current zoning, we
could come back in with the conditional use for multi-family, which would have a significantly larger number of units and significantly larger traffic impact. Lots more people who could object. And that is not really what the developer you know wants to do. We don't really think that that's the best site for multifamily. It's not at an intersection. It's not really in the urban urban core. So single family use compared to what could go on to that site, I guess I'm I'm asking you to weigh that and say that you know there is a significant
amount of commercial that could be built. It's already got the right zoning, doesn't need any zoning approvals, just go through the regular site plan process. However, at this location, not being at an intersection, we really felt like single family detached was a better use. Um, the lot size, again, is is really just a function of what's happening everywhere in Pasco County. And it's happening just to the south of 52. To say that it's not happening right now north of 52 is just um Just a
f it is a fact, but it's what is telling you is that growth, and you all know this, it's moving north along 41 and it's moving in north of 52 now. You have all those developments along uh 41, um the large multifamily uh MPDs that are beginning to be not totally but mostly built out or bought by um developers. And so development is moving north. People built these larger homes.
Mr. Chair, I'm a little concerned that the applicant's going beyond the scope of your question and effectively expanding her rebuttal time. So Is it answered or not?
That sounds good. We're I think yeah, I think you all you need to say and I don't think we have any other questions here. Do we? Anybody have any questions?
If there are no questions, then uh I'll listen to a motion.
I'm listening.
Again, it's Jamie Girardi, and I'll I'll I'll speak on this. I mean, uh again, I'm I'm not necessarily opposed to residential use. I mean, there's no question there's residential moving north on 41. Again, my my same or what I've said it multiple times before was that the problem that I have with it is just the size of the lot that is proposed. I mean, you're talking about 40-foot lots. If this was something coming in that was a 60-foot lot or something that seemed more compatible to what was in the area on the other side of 41, I think this is something that I could
support or I would be in favor of. However, just the size of the lots just don't seem compatible. So I'm gonna make a motion to recommend denial based on Um I think we have to include a recommendator condition, correct? Right. Condition one. The proposed change is not consistent with the existing land use pattern in the area.
Okay.
Do we have a motion? Do we have a second?
I second the motion.
Okay, that's Roberto Saez. Right. All right. So we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion on the motion?
All in favor of the motion signified by roll call.
Jamie Girardi?
Roberto size?
Hi.
Christopher Poole? I Chris Williams?
Aye.
Chairman Charles
Gray.
Hi.
So that was a motion to deny. Right. Thank you. Based on uh number one. Right. Thank you.