PC2 PDD 20743 54 Crossings MPUD professional office rezoning
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, Nov 21, 2019
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, Nov 21, 2019
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 6m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 70% of 56 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Following item PC two is PDD 20743 in the name of 54 Crossings, MPUD Master Plan Unit Development District, Colwell Avenue Properties 4. It's a rezoning request from an MPUD Master Plan Unit Development District to an MPUD Master Plan Unit Development District to allow 152,895 square feet of professional office on approximately 2.16 acres. This comes here with a recommendation of approval. conditions as included in your agenda packet and this is just basically reviving a portion of the old Concord Station Master
Plan Unit Development District and not adding any additional entitlements to that. Approval.
Is the applicant present?
Anyone here to object?
Denise, I got a couple of questions on this. Should we pull it or I mean I don't know. I mean this one was already an M PUD and it's just reviving the right-of-way.
Yeah, that portion of the MPUD is expired, so we're reviving it.
Uh in general my question is about cross access, cross access to the West. Um I don't maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see any reference on the M P D as far as requiring cross access to Ballantry for access. Yeah, a requirement to Do the turn lane. But at the boundary fifty four entrance if it's not already done. But there's nothing on the M P D requiring an access from The road that comes out of boundary, that Imprel Drive.
Okay.
Should that be indicated?
I'm having Tammy come up to speak on that item. I believe that that's something that's required in our land development code anyway, but I'll have her speak to that item.
Tammy Seth or Planning and Development. A preel drive actually comes off of State Road 54 through this subject property. So they already have cross access. There's an easement for the Ballantray shops to be able to use a preel drive.
It just doesn't show up on the on the on the drawing, is that what you're saying?
Well the signalized intersections at Ballantray Drive, right? So somebody coming to this parcel will come from Ballanty Drive, Ballantray down a preel? opening at this property,
is there? They could they could get there from there, but a preel makes a turn south Through this property. Approval connects to State Road fifty four.
So I guess. To answer the question directly, can th can this project get on apparel drive to the to the light?
Yes.
Is that their primary access or no?
State Route fifty four.
Okay.
There will be a connection at Pearl Drive is what you're telling them.
Correct.
A preel comes off of State Road fifty four directly through this property.
So I guess we're not going to be able to I think I know what Mr. Jorge's concern is that it's showing an access error the MPD plan is showing an access arrow. Off fifty four is not showing an ac and it shows a pedestrian access arrow. at Ayrshire Boulevard but it doesn't show any Access arrow at a prel drive.
Because as apprill exists It's the access is already there.
So So you can't say that it's just because a brill exists.
And I think the code probably takes care of it. I think they're probably required to do it, but I mean typically we see the M P D's and they usually sh indicate access points.
Two. If that's a concern, you could make a motion for approval conditioned on them adding an access arrow at apprill drive.
Is the applicant where is the who's the applicant? How old are you representing the applicant?
I can pack it right.
Are you all intending to access the Perl Drive? Yes, there is an access to You give
us your name and address please.
My name is Ali Atefi, uh Ling Sun Associates, fifty twenty three, uh West Laurel Drive in Tampa, Florida.
So does the applicant
have I haven't been sworn by the way. I didn't get up.
Do you swear for any testimony you're about to give the pictures to Hope you got?
Thanks for it.
Does the applicant have any objection to modifying the MPD plan to show an access arrow? At April Drive.
No, we don't have any objection. It's just that the arrow was omitted from the plan.
Yeah. With Hillward Henderson, 600 Cleveland Street, suite 800. You've been sworn. I have been sworn. Thank you. The arrow was omitted from the plan and can be added before first reading.
Okay, so make that a condition.
That's a question. Yeah, that was it. That was all. That's it. Thank you. Okay.
So we want to make that a condition of the motion.
If you want to make a motion for approval
With the condition that they had an access arrow for a pearl drive. On the M P D plan.
Who made that motion? Mike you or
I can't make the motion. No, I mean I'll make that motion. Okay. Okay.
Sounds
like Mr. Gerardi just made that motion.
Okay, so we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion?
Aye.
Opposed? Okay. Very good.
I can't get anything by you. Sorry. That was
a
good catch.
Yeah,
buddy.