PC5 PEG 247783 zoning amendment to AR without conditions
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
This archive found it in the recording: a call to order, a recess, or business the board never listed. The county recorded nothing about it, so everything below is our reading.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Planning Commission, May 16, 2024
The published PDF. Its text could not be extracted, because it is an image-only scan, so nothing in it is searchable here. It still reads normally.
The county’s minutes for Planning Commission, May 16, 2024
The published PDF. Its text could not be extracted, because it is an image-only scan, so nothing in it is searchable here. It still reads normally.
What was said
Machine transcription of 26m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 64% of 148 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Okay, so back to PC five.
Welcome, Liam.
Thank you. Good afternoon. Liam De Bine, Planning and Economic Growth Department.
So this is PC five.
P E G twenty four-seven seven eight three, and I'm gonna try to pronounce this name the best I can, and I apologize for pronouncing it wrong. Um Dayan Gordana V-Vunovich, which I'm sure I pronounced that wrong, so I do apologize. This is a U cleaning zoning amendment from AR with conditions to AR agricultural residential district without conditions. The future land use is REST III under the comprehensive plan. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property and build one additional single-family dwelling on a new lot in conformance
with the AR Agricultural Residential District standards. I would like to note that there is no voluntary deed restriction with this, so with this. Rezoning, it could allow up to four dwelling units. The subject site is located in the northwest corner of Seabiscuit Lane and Gideop Lane.
It's located in the North Market area and is outside of the urban concentration and rural areas.
Here is our context map.
Here's a zoomed in aerial. Of the subject site?
The surrounding future land use is Res3.
And the surrounding zoning is AR agricultural residential.
The subject site contains a single family dwelling on approximately 5.07 acres, and access to the site is from Seabiscuit Lane and Gideup Lane, which are both ingress-egress easements with a um approximately 50 feet of width for those easements.
On June 27, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners, BCC, approved rezoning petition number 6530 to add these conditions. There were two conditions added to that. One of the conditions was specifically rezoning approval that only allowed a minimum lot size to be five acres per lot. The other one required the total acreage not have to go through subdivision review. So there could only be just subdivided 12 times. Each lot would have
to be five acres for the minimum lot size and did not require to go through subdivision review.
Again, by approving this rezoning request, you would be removing all of the conditions requiring the applicant to go through subdivision review, allowing him to subdivide the property one addition well another time to build his one single family home that he proposes. And this is coming with recommendation for approval from Planning and Economic Growth Department. Okay. Anyway,
any questions for Liam?
Could you
So the previous rezoning action had a condition that did not require them to go through subdivision review. Um if he rezones, he would be required to go through subdivision review. Because you would be removing that condition.
And then the deed restriction, you said there was no deed restriction so this could potentially allow for
additional And not four additional, four in total? Four total lots. And is there A reason did staff ask for a deed restriction? Staff did not ask for a deed restriction. Okay.
Okay.
Any other questions?
Okay, uh is the applicant present? Would you like to speak at this time or I'm I'm assuming we have other people. So I guess uh we'll now take public comment on this item.
The first person signed up to speak is David Esther.
Good afternoon. David Esther, uh [address removed]. Um as you mentioned, this has already gone through This process once before at that time we deter we we fought it hard but we did agree and we gave into allowing for five acre laws, but the whole intention of that area was to be nothing less than five acres um so that our homes would be protected and maintain a certain uh level. You know, they're all block
homes, they're all um well maintained. We our roads couldn't handle the traffic. Even when Mariano came out and visited, he agreed the roads were not in condition for that. The Um changing this, even those just impact one particular thing, opens the door to all the other neighbors doing the same thing, wanting to split, wanting to sell off another piece, more and more homes coming in, nobody taking ownership of fixing the roads, uh, things like that. We've even put the road to a vote test before
to try and turn it over to the county and get it paved so that we could have uh better conditions like even mail at our houses instead of uh Down that uh kitten trail, uh, that requires 100% approval. So adding this house in, you're impacting our road uh impact without 100% approval of us. Our roads have been smoothed out a little bit. He dumped a bunch of concrete. Uh there was no meeting. There was no, can we do this? There was no agreement to put that stuff down, to put, to change the roads, to impact uh that, or to even it
can no longer be great. I can't maintain it myself. It's solid concrete. You have to watch out for sharp rocks sticking up. Um we can't have another house, another septic tank, another well. We just the county just approved, I was just in a meeting not too long ago, they approved over 300 homes behind us. If you wanted smaller property, sell your house and go somewhere and get that. That's the way I look at it. I bought two properties. I bought one for me and my in-laws bought the one next to me. Uh we're not looking to subdivide them. Uh originally
people were looking to subdivide them into one acre lots, which then is gonna downgrade the type of homes that go on there from nice homes that are probably well over four hundred, five hundred thousand dollars in value to Trailers. And we're looking to avoid that. Why I like to accommodate, especially if it's a family need and split the property, I got a family member coming in. At the same time, I don't want to open up that door to the next property next to them doing the same thing, the two across from them doing that. Now I've got four houses on the road. I
just went through construction of a new house in front of me. I can't tell you how many times I couldn't get down the road because of construction equipment blocking the entire pathway. Even though I have um twenty two percent interest in that easement, and they have six percent interest in that easement, and I you're gonna split it more. Um this is this is a ongoing problem. We're gonna add that more construction if we open it up to other homes, that's gonna be even more problematic. Um so while I'd like to compromise, I just Don't want to open
that door and removing that condition that was put in place and already split that property once. Now we're gonna do it again. I I wanna avoid that. Um
And uh I think I covered I think they told me three minutes. I tried to
skim
through it all up.
I tried to
get it all in. I'm sorry. That's okay. I didn't know it was a three minute time limit.
Yeah, no problem. Thank you for coming though.
All right. Any questions for me or All right.
The next person signed up to speak is Linda Ruggieri.
Good afternoon. My name is Linda Rujiri. I live at [address removed]. I and that was my son in law. The only thing that I'm going to add is that uh Commissioner Mariano attended a resident meeting that we had. and he personally observed the road. He agreed that splitting parcels was not in the best interest of the residents and the commission the commission denied the request. He physically came out, he swore exactly, you know, uh how
the roads are, where the conditions are and I it's not a good idea to split it again. Uh we we thought we finished that but i it came up again. When was this meeting? Mm.
When was the meeting that Commissioner Mariano came out and said
that
the Mm-hmm?
ago?
Two thousand and six.
Two thousand six. Two thousand six.
This was we've been there for twenty years. Yeah.
Yeah. And uh like he said when we bought it we bought five acres each with n not any intentions of splitting it. You know, we we want to keep the integrity of of our development. Uh a lot of people have moved in and put uh a lot of uh there's more horses, uh there's more animals on the property, which is nice. Uh we don't want to uh upset that. So I I had other things to say but my son in law said it again so already so I don't wanna waste your time but
I don't feel it's a good idea to ha to allow this to happen.
Very good. Thanks for coming.
I don't have anyone else signed up to speak on this matter.
Okay. Um as the applicant now you you guys do have a time to you can come up and rebut anything you heard or you can come up and do your presentation now if you want to come up and speak.
Good afternoon guys. My name is Dion, also Double Numic One Four Five Six Five Git Air Plane. So when we moved there, what five years ago? Four years ago, you
could barely pass through that road. There was potholes. You would literally have to drive onto the neighbor's property to get by. We volunteered with a couple other neighbors to bring in, you know, road stuff that to fix it up so it was fine and that dandy. So We're just trying to add another home to the property. I guess this is the process that we have to go through to hopefully get there. But we're just trying to get one more house for my in laws on there. There will be no further development, you know, or selling. So whatever deed
restriction we need to add on it, that's absolutely fine with us.
Okay. Anything from up here?
Uh question for staff when they come back.
Okay. Um Yeah, I I I guess uh the problem I I guess the the problem that's created and why the whole issue of the deed restrictions came up is because if it's just approved the way it is, it opens the door for not only you but also your neighbors and and kinda sets the precedence for in the future for the subdivision as Liam explained that goes to four lots for your instead of one lot it becomes four and then it kind of
snowballs out of control there. Meanwhile the neighbor across from us was allowed to put a module home there. I don't know by who or how or what, but so those restrictions that were put in and place at once that is only block, you know, that doesn't exist anymore since we have a fully modular home right across the street from us.
Mm.
Yeah, I don't know David, as far as enforcement of deed restrictions, I mean is that Go back to the building department or
is there a deed restriction? I don't think there is a deed restriction at all. Okay. I don't know if they have a private deed restriction, but in terms of the public restrictions, I don't think there's any And Liam can tell me if I'm wrong. The prior conditions of approval didn't require block ohms. Did they re uh
The conditions on the current zoning district that's on there does not require block homes.
So I'm not sure what where this requirement is that you're talking about.
He just mentioned the the block homes, so I wasn't aware if there's any details as of that.
That's not a county imposed requirement.
As far as maintenance of the roads go, I mean those are private roads out there, so who is responsible to maintain those? Just is there a There there looks like there's probably an easement.
It's a good pair. I mean I don't know guys. I mean we've been there for four years and as I said, as when we moved in, literally you would have to drive onto the neighbors of the property to go up the road since it was falling apart and just and that a sugar sand was that coming through. So nobody has maintained the road since Mickey did it that the last time. So I don't know what they're talking about, about grading. I haven't seen him on a tractor once. Okay. So
Li Liam is the Are the easements county right-of-way easements or are they private ingress egress easements?
If you give me a moment, let me double check on that. I don't want to give you a wrong answer.
Yeah, and just for w we can't take comments from the the audience there 'cause we have to be able to pick it up on the microphone for the clerk, so
I mean fine E two in the agenda mm most says they're ingress egress easement, but I I guess we'll let Liam confirm they're not.
I'm confirming it by looking at their legal uh at their legal description. There are ingress and egress easements.
So there's no county or public right to use these roads.
I don't know the answer to that, David. I just know that they're ingress they're called out as ingress and egressements. They are listed they it is a a named road, Gide Up Lane, for example, is a named road. It is listed as privately maintained residential.
Well was this area it's not platted then. Those aren't platted
It is not platted, um hence the um condition of approval stating that they didn't have to go through subdivision review.
So And David, I don't know if you want to get in.
We'll ask you a legal question. I don't know if you got the answer or not. We see this often where Someone will Deed by meets and bounds, a piece of property. And then less than a little bit. Four. and then subject to an ingress egress easement over fifteen feet or twenty five feet. When they create that ingress egress easement. Does that necessarily give s give the beneficiary
of that easement any right to improve the easement. My my understanding of an easement is you now have the right to go across that area of land, but you don't necessarily have the right to pave that land or grade that land or do anything else with it.
I mean I without seeing the easement, I don't know that I can answer the question. Because it depends on the terms of the easement. I see.
So
I I don't have the easement that you're referring to to know what
But I think you would generally have the right to maintain it. So that you have to maintain it. If it's an ingress egressment to the extent you need to make improvements to allow you to ingress and egress. to your property, I think you have that right, because otherwise you would lose the benefit of your ingress and egress easement.
The problem is sir that that's a sugar sand azo area. So as soon as the top layer of whatever is applied to it breaks loose, the sugar sand just comes up and you just cannot drive through that without a four by four or anything. So it's not like it's just a flat dirt road, you know, that nobody takes care of. Like it has to be maintained in in order that to be azul usable.
And did I hear you say you were willing to deed restrict this to
No no I was just saying uh that if we need to put any restrictions onto my property, you know, that I'm only allowed to do this one zoning just to allow one dwelling. you know, I'm totally okay with that. I'm not planning on developing something there and selling off lots or something, you know. It's my family property, so we're planning on staying there. I understand.
And did the staff talk to you about AR one zoning? What the difference between AR and AR one is AR allows for mobile homes where AR one only allows for site built homes.
I mean to be honest with you sir, I came in here I mean to your colleagues to ask to build a house. You know they started this whole process. I'm just going along as of it, so I'm not requiring any kind of rezoning or anything, but I just want to know how I can put another dwelling on the property. So whatever you tell me
It's fine. I'm just what I'm trying to find out is if you would be opposed If we made a recommendation for AR one zoning, which would then require that any home that you built on that site be a site built home. I don't want to say a block home because it could be a wood frame home, but it would have to be a site built home, not a
blueprints for uh for it might be easier if
he's doing a deed restriction to just put in the deed restriction.
He could just deed restrict it that it's one additional additional site built home.
That's easier I think than changing the zoning application to something else.
So whatever the easiest way is most painless way t to get this done that's
Denise in two thousand six did the AR f is it AR five Did that exist?
Yes.
I'm just kinda curious, and I don't know if you know the history and it probably doesn't matter that they zoned at AR but then conditioned it up being upon being five acre lots rather than One acre lots.
It's it's very strange to me because there's AR five adjacent to the north, so that I don't understand why they didn't do an AR five. But yes, it did exist in two thousand and six. Oh okay, Liam knows the answer.
And it doesn't have to be one acre, sir. I mean if I have to like split it in half, whichever whatever number comes up to uh
I don't think they can.
I'm listening to the neighbors. I'm hearing the neighbors' concerns. And I hear your intent. And I don't think there's probably not anybody up here that has any problem with what you're proposing It's what happens if you d all of a sudden decide to sell the property or you should have some tragic loss in the family. You know, you you've you've got to sell this and the next guy comes along. And then wants to divide it up into one acre lots. So I
think that's what I'm saying. any concern here might be. I'm not I'm not even quite sure I have a concern about that.
Well that's why I said if if you want to put that deed on it that it cannot be subdivided any more as or further, I'm totally okay with that. I and I appreciate that. I do.
Okay, so here's the answer. So basically what occurred at the hearing in 2006 is that um the there was a motion for denial. and that motion actually carried through. Then Commissioner Mariano within that motion for denial directed staff to do a staff initiated rezoning for the area to AR five. Because the folks in the room I suppose wanted to move forward with with the zoning action.
They're like, well, why can't we just put a condition on the AR that their five acre lots And then that other condition that stated that they don't have to go through s subdivision review was added. So but originally there was a request from Commissioner Mariano. to do a staff initiated rezoning to
AR five. AR-5 is a less stringent. I mean or more stringent, I should say. zoning district, so I don't know why they couldn't have just moved approval for AR five at the dais.
I don't know the answer to that. But that's what was offered up by the development director and the then um acting zoning administrator.
I guess either way though, they they would be seeking a rezoning anyway from even if it was currently AR five, they'd be seeking a rezoning Instead of from A R they'd be syncing it from A R five.
Have you spoken to Commissioner Mariano since he's the guy that made this recommendation? Me? Yes. No, no sir, I didn't.
No, we have not spoken to Commissioner Mariano.
Was eighteen years old. Okay.
Should I? I mean I wasn't advised to since that's been like almost twenty years.
Well, I'm
Commissioner Mariano's appointment to this board. I'm hesitant.
to make a motion that is contrary to something he did in the past. Maybe he has had a change of heart or change of mind. And I think it might be a wise idea if you were to consult with Commissioner Mariano and maybe the neighbors Should consult with Commissioner Mariano and I would tell you that I'm probably leaning towards a continuance to allow you to go do that.
The other reason a continuance might be advisable is There's no deed restriction before you. I mean normally when an applicant wants to propose a deed restriction it's on your agenda. Like you you actually
Yes, yeah. There's been a k a couple of times it hasn't, but yeah I agree with you.
But it's obviously up to the Planning Commissioner Yeah.
Yeah, I mean my my concern on the on this one, just frankly, is is that it sounds like the roads are problematic as they are and w n even though it's only one person, one house, one additional lot. We're adding more traffic to that road.
Um without a mechanism to improve it.
Correct.
That's my issue. With that. And I generally wouldn't be opposed. to this kind of thing other than that there was already a past decision That five acres was the appropriate zoning, whether it be AR1 with a condition, or I'm sorry, AR with a condition or AR5.
Yeah, times have changed and maybe he's changed his mind. So I
On what their the ownership of the roads What was it? Or did you have any any more
information on the other? I didn't find anything else. I don't know if Denise
Well if they're not county maintained, that means the county does not own them by maintenance. The only w other way I could think we would own them would be by deed or plat, but it's not platted, so Unless somebody deeded these roads to the county.
Which Seems unlikely. Did Is the property prior showing them as
They're shown as private.
Private
mapper. Yeah. Yeah.
That I don't think they I I think they're all privately owned.
Yeah, my my concern with this one is the precedent that it sets for the neighborhood and I I agree with Commissioner Moody that I'd feel more comfortable if that matters was was discussed with um Commissioner Mariano, honestly.
And I would echo that. I mean you open the door for all the neighbors to do that.
Correct.
Yeah.
I don't want to deny you today because I'd like to Yeah. I can tell you personally I'd like to speak to him about this. Um Like I said, this is it's not quite twenty years since the rezoning happened. And things are different in the county today. I don't know whether he feels the same way today as he did then, but I think it would be behoove all of us to Take a breather for a minute and then get his opinion on this and then take the matter up again.
So I'd make the mo motion to continue this to a date uncertain to Well,
Sorry, I only cringe because I d I don't want to have to do renoticing and add that additional expense.
What would be the next available date that we could hear this that would allow time for you guys maybe to set up a discussion and maybe have the commissioner make a field trip out there. I don't know what uh whatever he wants to do.
So then I don't know that this is gonna allow us enough time, but the next planning commission meeting that is on on this side of the county is June eighteenth. The one that follows that is July twenty fifth. Do you want to con Continue it to July twenty fifth. Yeah.
Okay.
Okay, there's a motion for continuance to July twenty fifth. Is there a second?
Okay. Uh any other discussion up here?
Do we have to be here in person?
All right, uh all in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? This will be continued to July twenty fifth, New Port Richey.
Thank you.