PDD18-SE-7343 Duke Energy substation expansion
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 15, 2018
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 15, 2018
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 1h 46m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 64% of 501 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Ernie Monaco, Long Range Planning. Planning and development. So I need to go make sure. That we have the right one. You want yours? Yes, I want mine, yes. The newer one. Uh before we begin, I'd like to actually request that the clerk be able to receive and file the ex parte communications between individual commissioners and stakeholders.
Okay, does that include the emails?
Yes. Everything recently, most about twenty minutes ago. So anything
that was forwarded to Denise, you have to I have
right here. Yes. Okay.
You print it out. What's that?
Any uh motion to receive motion approved. Anything file? Second, all in favor.
I'd also like to request uh we have a we have updated the agenda memo and the order because in the recent week uh the applicant has met with a neighbor group to resolve an issue and we wanted to put it in the latest version of that. So could I please uh allow to pass this out? Sure.
You gonna file it with us? Yeah, is that the same thing you just gave her? It's a different. Okay, so we have a motion. So do we need a motion to receive? Why not? If you want, does it hurt? Yeah, so have a motion to receive and file. Do we have a mo.
Receive and file. second
all in favor
aye aye thank you so
Okay. The subject today whoops I back to where I was.
Yes. PDD eighteen SE 7343 is special exception from Duke Energy Florida. You have seen these slides at least twice before, so what I'd like to do is just quickly summarize to refresh your memory and then focus on the new change, which is a condition of approval. I'm sorry. It's an electrical substation, it's a expansion on an ac on an agricultural district zone parcel and is adjacent to the property that they already have. You can see on the map right there South Market area off 54. Let
me get you a better map coming up. Right there is the site. Access to the site is from Satin Leaf Lane. It's a substandard dirt road, private. And additional access will be from the existing substation on Smith Road, which is a county maintained dirt road, but it's county-owned operated. And you can see in red is the expansion site.
Okay. Um the parcel zone, the AC Agricultural District. Uh they had to re-advertise. I think we went through this before. We don't need all that. Here's what's important, at least to quickly refresh our memories. Uh there were revisions from the last meeting, and I'm gonna show you on a map. The first one is a ten-foot-wide curvy linear planting bed was added along the southern edge, adjacent to the new driveway, next to the detention pond. So if you want to see the map right there, right there. in the bottom left, new 10-foot curvilinear planting right there. Oops, uh this one kind of
sorry.
Somebody fall down.
Okay. Uh the second thing is existing existing tree canopy to remain post construction is clearly noted. And you'll see the canopy right there in the upper left side, existing tree canopy noted on the plans? Okay, let me go back again. And third identified a minimum forty-five foot setback at the narrowest point along the southern edge of the expansion. So these are the the the conditions of approval as of two weeks ago. Let me go back and go next. And you can see that right there. On the right side
lower, 45 foot minimum structure setback. And then uh the expansion is Lincoln is about 7% of the parcel. Subject site is about 10.12 acres more or less. I'm gonna just talk to you about the revisions in the last week that have that we have made. And uh access to the subject site is from Satin Leaf Lane. It's a 25-foot right-of-way, it's a substandard private road. And additional access will be available from Smith Road, a 100-foot right-of-way,
but it's also substandard county maintained road as defined in section 901.4 of the LBC. The additional conditional of approval is this one. I'll read it into the record. The owner applicant agrees to improve and pave the unpaved portion of Smith Road, starting at the portion of Smith Road which is currently located south of Mandolin Cave Avenue. and continued to and including the unpaid portion of Satin Leaf Lane, terminating at
the applicant's western property boundary on Satinleaf Lane, Such paving shall be completed within six months of completion of the applicant's construction of the Substand Substation Expansion, but no later than june thirtieth, twenty twenty. The paving of Satinleaf Lane is subject to and conditioned upon the applicant obtaining approval Of the Satin Leaf Lane Owners Association pursuant to the rules and requirements provided for in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, and Easements for
Satin Leaf Lane, which was recorded on august fifteenth, twenty fourteen, in the Official Records Book nine oh seven three, page thirteen fifty three, of the public records of Pasco County. If said portions of Smith Road are Pasco County owned right-of-way at the time applicant commences the road improvements, the applicant shall improve Smith Road to the applicable Pasco County standards. However If said portions of Smith Road are no longer owned by Pasco County, but have been either vacated or
otherwise conveyed to private ownership. Then the road improvements shall conform to the standards approved by the applicable owners of Smith Road. So we are recommending Let me actually read the title again so we know this is a special exception, Duke Energy, Florida, a special exception for an electrical substation expansion in an AC agricultural district, south central Pasco County, on the north side of Satleaf Lane, approximately 650 feet west of Smith Road, containing approximately 10.12 acres. With the recommended Planning Commission action
is to approve the special exception request as set forth under the recommended conditions. Which which we have talked about the most recent ones. And I'm we're going to I'm gonna think we need to turn it over to the applicant who actually is going to address and uh the latest developments. Okay. Okay. Okay.
Thank you. You come up and state your name and address, please.
Good afternoon. My name is Andrew Gilmore with Duke Energy, 3300 Exchange Place, Lake Mary, 32746. I'm in the Sighting, Permitting, and Engagement Division for Duke Energy. Good afternoon. If uh we could Uh just switch over. We had a very brief uh presentation. Uh,
Mr. Gilmore, before you get into your presentation, are you in agreement with the changes to the agenda memo and the additional condition that Mr. Monaco just read? We are. Okay.
If we could somebody get in your presentation up there.
this is
there you are.
It's only a handful of signs.
Mm no, I'm not sure which one there.
Okay, well let me um sorry to uh this is the presentation.
Sure. Make a motion. Do we hear a motion? Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Sure.
Clark needs one.
Just give her a copy, yeah,
please.
Thanks, sir.
We shouldn't like this.
All right, so I think we're good to go here. So
Just a a real quick overview. I think you folks had seen this at our last hearing. This is an expansion to our existing substation that was approved in 2003. At that time in the county findings of fact these facts here were established that this, among other things, this uh our existing substation feeds uh with Lacucci. uh Rivers Distribution Substation. Um also of note, of course, um for us that
at the time that this was a approved back then um our uh company at that time it was Florida Power um but had uh indicated that we would be looking at future expansion. It was always planned uh to be designed for a future expansion. At that time we had predicted six to ten years. Some things had happened with the economy and growth had slowed but now we are back Um Uh with the uh planned expansion of the substation that we had uh forecasted at the time that
the original substation was built.
So let me ask you if I may, Mr. Chairman Mariano, wouldn't that apply to to the uh first piece of property that you're talking about? Really wouldn't have anything to do with this new piece of property you've acquired.
Well I think uh you know uh being fifteen years ago we wouldn't have known what
We knew we had to expand it, but we did not have plans, specific plans at the time of what that would look like because that's not designed later until we get actual load growth statistics and then mash that with future load growth predictions. And that really dictates what capacity needs to be added. We knew that Pasco County would continue to grow, all indications. But at the time. We we wouldn't have known what the expansion would look like or how much uh land it would take out.
So uh just to be clear, was this land you already owned or you just acquired?
So if you look at the image up here, the original special exception permit uh was for this parcel here, uh roughly the same size, uh a little over ten acres. Um This outline here shows the footprint of our existing substation. This outline here shows our proposed expansion. This is the uh this parcel we recently purchased this year. This is the subject parcel
before you today. Our expansion into that new parcel is approximately 1.27 acres. Um and so it's this small piece here that uh triggered the requirement for a special exception permit for this subject parcel here. All right, thank you.
This is uh just an aerial you've seen very similar ones, but as we begin to talk about the different neighborhoods, I just wanted to make sure uh for the folks that may not be familiar with the area, this is if I can get this to the right-this is uh uh State Route 54. The County Road, Smith Road, uh comes down here. around this bend and for all intents and purposes stops here. This is no longer a passable road. I don't know if it's been legally discontinued or not, but this is no longer passable.
So for the purposes of uh this discussion, the county road, Smith Road really comes down, stops here. And From this point west, this is the private satin leaf lane, this section here. And as you heard earlier, we've agreed to pave the county pavement stops essentially right there and we've agreed to pave all the way down over to the western edge of our new parcel. What
you see here is our again our existing substation here. This is the proposed expansion here to the west. The neighborhood right around uh the substation is Santon Leaf. These are the uh Santon Leaf owners here. This neighborhood uh directly to the south is the province at Meadow Point. Uh these are two distinct neighborhoods, um so there's no passage in between. They have their own entrances. So the uh
primary really only entrance into Satin Leaf is from County uh Smith Road into Satin Leaf Lane, and then the entrance to the um Meadow Point neighborhood is here off of Meadow Point Boulevard.
So what has happened since our last hearing? At the last hearing there um was discussion. There there was not a lot of uh discussion, I think, on the landscape plan itself except for one Section here where it was pointed out there was a gap and why do we have a perimeter here? There was an easement that looked like a former drainage easement. We had to do some more research on that to figure out what we could and could not do, which we have done. So what you'll see here, as
Mr. Monaco had pointed out, was we uh modified the landscape plan here. So that one section is the only modification before you today that's new from the uh enhanced uh landscape plan that you saw before.
The uh other um one other point that the Meadow Point uh province of Meadow Point uh neighbors had uh mentioned or requested was a vantage point, a photo simulation, if you will, which I I do have copies here if you don't um if you haven't seen that yet. which we have uh created for them and had uh given that to uh their attorneys and we had submitted it as well. Um if it's all right I can pass these out if you're interested in seeing those. Same motion.
Move to receive and five. Second.
All in favor? Aye. Motion carries.
Which one of you seconded the motion?
I didn't know somebody I thought somebody down there said.
Pete.
Okay.
I think Mike made the motion. Okay.
Another area that uh received a lot of attention uh as well are or was what has been the communication flow, if you will. And I I know um certainly there were a number of folks who had felt that um you know Duke was not being very communicative and so we we've really uh tried to uh demonstrate that um in our view that we uh we didn't feel that was the case but we recognize if people had felt that way that we needed to uh do more.
So in your uh packets I believe we put together the communications log really from uh the beginning of when we uh began to talk to uh neighbors about this proposed expansion. I think um for the satin leaf uh neighborhood, but I'll I'll just go back so we can refer to the map again.
Uh we most recently met in person with uh several owners in this neighborhood. One of the things that I think you folks asked uh for clarity on was uh uh where we stood with the road, were we gonna pave it or not, and how did the neighbors feel. So we we've agreed to that uh condition. There are um I think owners from this neighborhood here today, so I don't want to speak on their behalf, but what we heard them say as well is that they were interested in having this paved. Uh security is a
concern, and so we're working with them as well, uh, and that's why I believe the uh condition language before you. Has uh several different possibilities, uh whether it's uh private or public, and we'll continue to work with them. The um
We again have uh discussed that issue as well with uh county staff and so uh we believe we've reached uh agreement um with uh the the closest neighbors on the condition of the road and and agreed to that condition. As far as that, I am not aware of any other outstanding uh issues that we've uh not addressed. If anything new comes up today, we uh we can certainly address that with the Satin Leaf neighborhood. Um in the uh province at
Meadow Point neighborhood, uh we met with 12 or 15 uh neighbors and their attorney uh back on uh Monday, October 29th. A lot of the uh discussion um had to do with again the westward expansion and why uh can we not or why uh will we not move uh north. And I can give you the highlights of that again and I'll uh uh happy to answer any questions for
you, but The Discussion at the last hearing really centered around cost, which uh was disheartening to me because cost is not a driver of the decision to move west or move north. In fact we've got you know a quarter million dollars in enhanced landscaping way far uh and above what we uh normally do uh for something like this. If it if it were just a matter of cost, I I don't think we'd be here. Um what we cannot do if you
see this expansion, while we're only moving into the new subject parcel, approximately 1.27 acres. This expansion is much uh uh larger than just the 1.27 acres. Uh it comes from our existing sub and moves uh west here. There's not enough room uh to uh move north if we could do it, and we can't for several reasons. I think we explained last time this is a 230 yard. We have to tie into the 115, which is on the southern uh part of the existing substation.
Again, it won't fit, but if we could move it north, we would have to cross over this northern yard here, the 69, to uh tie in here. There's an existing uh 69 kV line that already comes down here and feeds uh with Lakuchi's distribution sub. We have another existing 115 line that comes uh this way. And we have an existing 69 KB that already uh comes down here. So if it were possible to move it
north, we would have multiple line crossings and we would be tying in uh uh a a new yard up here with the southern yard and having to cross wa uh what's already there. For us that design is significantly inferior for a number of reasons. Safety is a huge one. We would have multiple line and equipment crossings that we don't design into substation designs. If you can imagine having different voltage lines and trying to do work, we Can't
work over an energized line, we have to have minimum safety clearances. In addition to the safety, which is our primary concern always with uh our uh linemen and our folks, would be the reliability of the design itself. You you if you have an alternative, you never design line crossings of uh transmission lines. Again. If we have to work on uh the upper line you have to take both of them out you can't work over an energized line. So there's reliability uh concerns and
the safety concerns are extraordinary and perhaps we didn't underpin that enough when we had spoken earlier, but this these are reasons why it's just not feasible uh for us to move north. Other considerations, those are the two primary. So safety is our absolute top concern. Second to that is the reliability of the overall grid in the system that that that wouldn't uh design would not work to maintain a reliable uh infrastructure here. In addition to
that, uh there's been some talk the this uh wetland up here is a higher value uh than the wetland to the west. We we would obviously be impacting it at a far greater rate than the uh current impacts to the West. And lastly, we don't own this land up here. We own uh this land as well. But again, if I can leave you with anything, the two primary reasons this doesn't work for us to move north is the safety issue and then the electrical tie issue and the reliability of the overall
design. We would not design a substation like that. Um so we discussed that um at length with the uh owners in uh Meadow Point. Um we discussed the modification to the um landscape plan again, adding that portion on the southern borders. We did also talk to them conceptually about the transmission lines as well. There was a lot of There were a lot of questions about that at the last hearing. And we show them
just conceptual because we do not have final engineering. Um, but we know we have this is an existing corridor right here, we would have to be tying into this existing corridor. And so we are not talking about, you know, new transmission lines, you know, coming in from the east or west or or having you know far greater impacts.
Um let me just query you, did you uh uh give us a submit a request for extra time? Written request?
I can't remember how much we have to do that.
I'm trying to give you uh the adequate time to explain it to everybody, but uh also we have certain rules and regulations.
Well and I can wrap this up fairly quickly too. Where where am I on the clock?
Uh well, I don't know, they're keeping it over there. Gotcha. So uh where do we stand on the clock there? Anyone know? Okay.
So anyway, go ahead and wrap it up and I'll commit to not going over five
minutes. Is that right?
Sure, you'll have questions that you'll have to come up and respond to.
Sounds good. Um so again, we met with the Meadow Point uh owners on the twenty-ninth. Since that time, uh candidly, we've not had a lot of communication um because we've not heard from them. We just learned the other day uh that they're not represented by the attorneys um that we were in communication with. So I I can't tell you um you know today that we were able to reach agreement with them. We did talk about um
the again the possibilities of of some uh enhanced landscaping but uh around the substation site itself it's it's a pretty robust landscaping plan already. I don't think there's much more we could do there that would have a um an added value for them if you will um so if I can just move forward real quickly here
We already covered those we covered here. Again, I just want to point out um over here these are the minimum code requirements for screening and buffering that are part of the county code. Our initial Landscape uh screening and buffer plan over here had uh met or exceeded uh in every category and then of course we've uh since have enhanced it after all the communications with the neighbors and uh with
you folks. In some cases were more than three times what the minimum uh requirements are.
And you're familiar with these. We went over them um if not both previous hearings, certainly the last one, but the special exception permit again on the subject parcel uh is subject to the six criteria uh that you folks have uh laid out. We um have met uh each of the uh six requirements uh for the special exception permit. And so where we are right now is
you know, uh hoping you folks will uh approve the permit today. We have brought forth a proposal we feel really limits the area of the substation expansion. We've screened um as much as we uh uh believe is uh practical to do. The if the special exception is approved today, this will move into site plan approval, of course, and there'll be a lot more detail and a lot more documentation and preparation, if you will. Again, just to refresh
your memory, our construction of the site is anticipated to begin January of 2020, so no construction next year, and end that same year, November. 2020. And I would again leave you with a request that you folks uh approve the special exception permit uh based on uh meeting or exceeding those six criteria.
All
right,
thank you. We appreciate that. Uh we're gonna see who's here now that has may have questions or comments, and then uh if appropriate, we can come back up and respond.
Thank you.
Okay. Uh for those who would like to come up and speak that have been sworn. Um You may begin. Please come up and sp state your name and address.
What your concerns are and what we'd like to do is Uh not repeat the same concerns every time somebody comes up. So try to bring something new.
Yes sir. Uh Ethan Lillbridge.
We have uh roughly three minutes.
Yes sir. Ethan Lillabridge uh [address removed]. Uh you know, Duke brought up the concerns that we have agreed to them to pave the road and there are security issues. Um I just like to go on the record that what they have agreed to is to provide a gated access um Um because we're worried about the traffic once this road is
paved. Um The other big concern that I have is understood that they've said they were gonna grow. The last I've been told they don't plan on growing anymore for 25 more years. In the last 25 years, this will now make the third substation. adjacent to my property. Um
I don't I don't want the landscaping plan they provided. I don't like the landscaping plan they provide. I prefer that they fence right up to their construction and either lease the land to us. donate the land to our neighborhood as a park, but I don't want them to have twenty acres when all they're required to have is ten. So if they can't do it on the ten they need and they had to buy more. Cut 'em
back to ten. And uh that's all I got.
All right. Thank you very much.
And who would like to be next?
Okay.
I've got a presentation that I had uh given to you up
there. Okay. Did you request extra time? Yes I did. Okay. How much time did you request? About fifteen minutes. Okay, we got a timer.
Yes, that's me. Um I'm Len Vanderholst. I live at [address removed] in the province neighborhood that's uh south of the development here. Um as you heard we no longer have legal representation. Um the funds that we initially put forth to that um we've exceeded that by double right now, and that was even before we've gotten to this point. So uh we basically had to go on our own with the Yes. The special exemption that they're looking for will have an impact on our property
values. They say that they won't see it from the neighborhood, but but it will be seen. It will require moving significant amount of trees, and I'll show you pictures of those as we go through. Um and uh Certainly the uh transmission lines that they didn't talk about will certainly have an impact on our property values, the views and everything that we see from currently from our neighborhood.
So the area in red that they have in there that's that's the uh the proposed area that they they plan on going into right now. Um if you go to the next slide or do I have a remote for that here? Yeah. Okay. Oh sorry.
Thanks. Well you really messed it up now. Now I'm on my now I'm on my okay. Uh this is one of the the pictures that they provided. Um it's uh a view from the end of the cul-de-sac looking towards where the uh proposed substation would go. If I was gonna hide the substation behind a house, that's probably the place I would take a picture from.
That red square is that house, nicely in line with where they projected the uh substation would go. So you really have to look at sort of the before and afters to really see what the uh the effect is there. That particular house, our neighbors Louis and Danielle moved into that. I talked to him on Sunday. He wasn't able to be here today. He bought that property because of where it was, adjacent to an open field on one side and a pond view on
the other side. So his backyard's going to have a wonderful view of the power substation when this is all done.
This is the view that they just provided with uh from our entrance. Um again, you know, it it uh it does show, you know, a nice tree line that's there, but uh as they talked about paving a road and and putting a road in there, a significant number of those trees are going to be removed. And that view will not look like that view anymore. And again, it's, you know, kind of a little bit of a uh an angle that that shows this in its best light. Just on the other side of where this
shows and
So they're looking at this view right here.
This slide shows just on the other side of the gate. Nice view across an open pond, trees across there. That's what we look at when we take the dog for a walk. That's what we see virtually every day as we pass by there. It's certainly less obstructed obstructed than most of the views that we have there. Once they put the power station in and they widen the road and everything else, you know, I'm maybe not as fancy as they are, but that's kind of what our view will be looking like. Regardless of how many trees they need to put in to cover
up the front of it, they're still gonna have to take a lot of trees out to put a road in there.
How wide is that route? Um I'll get to that in in just a second.
And that as I said in there, that's even before transmission lines go in there.
Sir, can I ask you a question? Because uh what you're saying isn't making sense to me in part. I understand why. they'd have to take down trees maybe for their power lines, but their p the road that they have to pave is all is they're just paving within the existing dirt right away.
Yeah. I'll I'll show you a picture of that.
So I don't think that I'm not it's not obvious to me why they'd have to take out trees to
pave that road. Okay. Um can you just bear with me for a minute? I'll get to the slide that has that on there.
Um
There is alternatives. You know, they said they couldn't move to the north. It wouldn't fit. That's the same size square moved up to the north there. It will fit. They talked about the wetlands being different. I've taken a look up through there. Usually wetlands usually are wet. That wetlands to the north is pretty dry. Not much in the way of water in there. I talked to our neighbor to the north there, Ori. He said it it might get wet when we have a lot of rain, but that's
about it. The wetlands to the west are actually even wetter.
Mm-hmm.
Um See. They talked about uh understanding how much time or how much uh expansion they would have. Um when I spoke to Andrew, is it? Yeah. Uh at Eric's house, he told me uh if this was kind of a green field, they would be able to fit the 230-volt substation, the 110, 115,000 volt lines in there, and the 69. All in the footprint that they currently have right now. And now they want to expand again.
Um although they said the permitting for this came in in 2003, the actual construction didn't go in place until sometime in 2008, just ten years ago.
Um in very various orientations that will fit in there. Whether they share land with Withlacuche, trade with the neighbors. Um they talked about if we went north it would affect the the neighbors in Ashley Pines. It does go no further north than the Withlacucci substation now. So it could fit in there. It's not that it's impossible. They said it's just hard and expensive.
There's either other options. They could move further east. There's open land there, there's open land there.
There is a a line that currently goes through there and that's what we see today.
If they get the substation to go where they want it to go now, they're gonna put lines. Right where we will see them. They're not going to run down the same corridor. They showed us conceptual drawings of where they might go, but they will go right through our neighborhood. The poles that they will be using are at least 20 feet higher than what we currently have. So they will double them up. We'll double up the lines and double up the poles.
And that will certainly have a negative impact on our property values.
They say they don't know where the lines are gonna go yet. Uh those markings there. are stakes in the in the ground right here, where those power lines conceptually might go. The trees that are marked here are trees that they Plan on taking down. You asked about the uh the road width?
Oh, sorry.
Yeah.
Um that's looking south down Smith Road now. It's the road's roughly about 20 feet wide. It's maintained by the county. The road that they want to pave is 11 feet wide with trees on both sides of the road. It's fairly narrow. Those trees would probably have to be taken out not only to accommodate the road. but to accommodate the uh power lines that they planned on going through there. So the natural buffer that's already there would be gone.
Sir, is this picture of Smith or Satin Leaf?
That's on Satin Leaf, um looking to the direction of the west.
So just so you understand on Satin Leaf, that's a private road. The county does not Mandate that that be any particular width. So
Right, but that's what they're talking about paving to gain access to the site.
We are not mandating that they widen that road to the point where they're taking out those trees.
Right, but that's what they've offered in the satin leaf neighbors to do that.
I there's nothing in the condition that says they have to take out those trees to pave that road. They could pave it right where it is.
Right
in the existing dirt is.
What would be what what is the requirement for a road to access a substation then? Is there is there a county
requirement? There are minimum county standard widths, which might apply on Smith Road. Right. But th they would not apply on Satin Leaf. They wouldn't apply for that? It's w their pavement to whatever standards they deem appropriate. It's a private road. They're agreeing to pave it. They're and I'll let Duke I'll let Duke respond, but I don't think they're intending to take out those trees when they pave it.
Are you? Let's uh let's keep the conversation this way.
How are we doing on time?
Six minutes.
Okay.
Okay. That's the same view on satin leaf except looking for the east. Again, a lot of tree cover on both sides of the road, which right now provides us a a a very natural barrier to what exists right there.
These are our houses with a view from looking back to where the proposed power station would go. You can see the trees along there. These are all our neighbors' houses, most of which are here today. We have a very nice country-looking view from there. That view would be severely jeopardized by not only the power station, but the lines that will go through there.
And in order to fit those corridors, they're going to have to remove a significant number of trees to go through there. So even though the they they may not need to remove trees for the road, they're going to have to remove significant amount of trees so that they have 100 foot wide paths to run these new power poles through there.
So again,
Working through this
Moving to the north seems to us to be the best option to go with. Uh it doesn't affect the visibility of the neighborhood around there now. It gives them easier access off of Smith Road, which is already a a significantly wider road.
They could install power lines down Meadow Point Boulevard and not have to cut through our neighborhood to connect up to them. Uh they wouldn't have to spend the quarter million dollars on landscaping because it's in a natural buffered area in there anyways. When we moved in there we we didn't even have any idea that the existing substation was there. Um When
did
you move in? What I
moved a year ago. One year ago. Yeah. And this power station was built when?
Two the existing one in two thousand and eight. Okay. So
it's
been there a long time. It's been well it's been there long certainly longer than we have. And and you know I when we moved in there I saw the power lines, we knew that there was something around there. What we didn't know that was the this expansion was gonna take place, you know, right into our backyards essentially.
And um yeah, so I talked about the fencing and and uh the corridors. Um it would keep it also s more or less a power station corridor along Smith. road there, uh where it would really impact no one except potentially the commercial properties that could be between uh Meadow Point and Smith Road.
So okay, we would just like them to move north.
I read in one of the emails that one of the residents out in your community sent to us, or at least to me. It said that Duke Energy would pay your legal fees.
There
was
an offer of that. Okay. Um we had discussed that when they came to talk with us.
So that's a that's a true statement. Yes. Okay. And then actually picture the the the home that you showed us? Yes. You said that was somebody that you referenced is only that home. Is that home under construction now or is somebody living in that home? When was the home built?
Our home that I'm living in the home.
No, no. The
home showed
in the photo.
The photo. Oh, um it was it was built what in two weeks ago. Yeah closed two weeks ago. Yeah
one day. So Thank you. So the person knew that there was a some type of No,
he was he had no idea that there was this construction was taking place.
No, I'm not talking about the construction. I'm talking about the piece of property behind the home that currently has some type of electrical facilities
on the troop.
He knew that.
He probably knew that that was there. He had no idea that there was a a motion for expansion. Okay.
Any other questions from there?
All right. Who would like to be next?
Could you come forward and state your name and address if you want to speak?
See no one.
Okay. Uh you wanna yes. Yeah, I didn't do four and oh well we gotta do that. Let's do it. Yeah. It's two minutes late, I apologize.
So my name is Ryan Riches, I'm a neighbor in Province, moved in in July. What's the address please? Uh [address removed]. And I appreciate everybody's time, especially now that we're on I think our third iteration here. And uh we did meet with Duke, they did provide a presentation which was basically to me a regurgitation of the same information that we had seen. Now, granted, when a power substation goes in, it's not just the substation, there's a lot more impact
involved. There's visual pollution from the lines. But the thing that kinda came to me was the fact that we're dealing with intelligent people, we're dealing with engineers who can come up with new ideas, they can redo things. They can look at other sites, but not once have we heard, yes, we considered this site or that site. And and we've even offered land of the north as a potential site. Um but we never heard anything back. So i as I look at it I hear from this meeting that it really comes down to safety and grid reliability. I
think it comes down to poor planning because if they planned properly on their first ten acres, the first go around, they could have fit this all in the ten acres. And one thing that they admit in the meeting was, Yeah, if we would have done it differently, we could have fit it in there. So for us as neighbors I don't think we need to pay the price for poor planning. We do support the energy and growth, and there are so many parcels of land available where they can still tie into the lines to serve the needs. There's growing construction on the 56 corridor, their
space. While I was driving up the road, I drove by the Charlie Mack substation, which has plenty of land available next to it, without neighbors being encroached.
So for me, if it is approved as planned, I'm going to have an extra set of lines running right through my backyard. Higher voltage 230K versus the 115K. That's going to mean not only more stuff cleared out, but it's going to mean visual pollution. It's going to be hearing the crackling of the higher voltage on the moisture. And um you know at the end of the day I think there's another solution that they can find. It's just not that solution. Thank
you.
Before you go, we may have some questions. I do have a couple of questions. Just as a curiosity, where are you on that map while you're home?
So where Esperanza court comes down, there's a pointer. Oh I I don't know if I'm very good at pointers. Yeah.
Which one is it? The late right here? Okay, so I'm about right there,
third house.
All right, and then you made a comment when you were speaking that you could have provided them the property to the north. Are you saying you control that property?
I don't. Um just from meetings that I was in in communications, um I had heard that the people who own that land have that ability and
opportunity to do
so.
I mean did they offer it that you know of and at a reasonable price? Do you know I mean I don't know what the other thing is? I don't know the details of the transaction on the owners,
but it was told to me Just here say through the meetings, yeah.
Okay. All right. Well thank you. I appreciate that. Yeah.
Okay, if there's no one else, uh would you like to come up and respond?
Hello everyone. Meredith Dell Camp from Shuts and Bowen on behalf of Duke Energy. My address is 4301 West Boy Scout Boulevard, Suite 300, Tampa, Florida, 33607. I'm just gonna be really brief and just kind of address a few of the points that were raised with regard to Satin Leaf. It is a private road and we've agreed to pave it. As a part of that, we do not anticipate taking off any additional trees as a direct result of paving that road. In fact, we're happy to work. Work with the neighbors to the extent that we can protect any ro any trees that would otherwise be impacted. We're happy to do so. With
regard to moving the substation to the north, it's not as simple as just moving the rectangle to the north. There's a lot of spacing requirements and a lot of other technical issues that have to be taken into consideration when you're moving electrical lines like that, especially since you have to connect. to the substation to the south. So it's not as simple as just moving the rectangle. And of course we don't own that land. It's not for sale. There's been no offer as far as I've ever heard that the the with Lakie would be willing to send that to us. And of course there is another residential subdivision to the north that I'm sure would have a lot to say about it going north
as well. Um And with regard to the transmission lines, we did in a gesture of good faith show the conceptual engineering of where the lines might come out, but it is of course conceptual and there's always a rub when you show conceptual drawings that they might change. But it's not accurate that the proposed structures are going to go twenty feet higher. At the meeting with the the neighbors we did commit to a long-term communication strategy of working with them on the design of the lines. Instead of doing two polls, potentially we could do one poll and and and they did
suggest some other routes with transmission lines and we're happy to continue to work with them through the process on that. But unfortunately The transmission line is squarely not a part of the six criteria for the special exception. There's state law on this, that that's not a part of the local government regulation. And we I spoke with their attorney when they were engaged on this and we all seem to agree that the transmission line siting is not a part of this process. Um it's just not part of the criteria and it can't be under state law. And just one last point of clarification on the attorney's fees. Duke did agree to make a beautification
contribution to the HOA. And they stand by that. But at the meeting, when we raised our agreement to make a financial contribution to the HOA, they advised that they actually don't represent the HOA as an entity, that they are just a group of owners that have come together. We still agreed to talk with them about the financial contribution and how that would work. But since that meeting, they've stopped communication and we haven't heard any more from them about any of those matters. But it is Duke's policy that they don't pay attorney's fees, if they know that, we've been pretty clear on that. But we did talk to them about
some other landscaping options, but then they they stopped communicating and we can no longer talk through their lawyer. So if you have any questions I'm happy to answer them at this time.
Mr. Chairman Mariano. Yeah, go ahead, Mike. Um so I'm not sure who from Duke wants to answer these. Uh
somebody would come forward so you can respond.
And then whoever responds, please give your name.
Yeah, so probably for the gentleman, because my first question is you you mentioned about safety issues, the lines, working on the lines and all that. Um how often in reality do you actually have to go into these things and do that type of work on a substation?
So I I I'm not an operations guy, but I will tell you we we predict um on a substation like this about five trips per month for maintenance online. So sometimes that's inside the substation fence, sometimes that's uh maintenance around the property itself. Now if there's a storm event. You know, that's completely different. Um I g I you know if if any any if this substation or any part of our infrastructure is uh impacted by a storm event or or other event, we would be in there doing
some significant maintenance. But no, it's not a a a a weekly line work or a monthly line work or anything like that.
So I I guess what I'm trying to get at is that the
It's not a significant amount of work that has to be done, you know, real often once these things are in place, the electricity flows, right?
Ex that's exactly the intent and that's the perfect world. But uh Commissioner Oak offer that it's not a matter of frequency. It's when that work has to take place. It's critically important to us that one, we have regulations, whether it's OSHO or otherwise, to have minimum uh clearances, and so this the safety is huge. Even if we only have to touch that line once, we're putting our men and women at risk if we've designed If we have design flaws. That's why we don't do that. And in addition to the safety issue, is the reliability.
So if you have multiple line crossings, you're crossing equipment when you shouldn't be, and there's a fault in any of that, you have to take everything out of service in order to address that. And so now we're causing unnecessary outages because of a built-in design flaw that that we wouldn't. Yeah.
You you had also stated that one of the primary reasons of doing this is to uh supply the With Lakie substation to the north.
Well this station feeds With Lacucci. Okay. Yeah.
So uh I'm really having a a problem with With why you wouldn't have expanded to the north when that's where you want you have to get to anyways. And you know, there was a comment here by the the young lady that um Something along the the lines that you don't know whether or not that land is for sale. Now why would With Lacucci not work with Duke Energy when the m the primary
purpose or apparently the only purpose of this expansion is to provide power to them?
So if if I could uh just correct one statement, that the primary driver for this is not with a Lacoucci. We are already feeding them and that's a 69 uh KV feeder that comes out of our existing station and is feeding them now. On going down Smith Road, we have a 115 KV circuit, and going uh south we have a 69 KV circuit, and we are adding the 230 circuits. And so the primary driver of this project is not with Lakcha. It's not to provide. So with
Lakuchi is not going to benefit at all from this?
They'll benefit from the overall capacity increase of this project and the reliability of the So The the grids are all connected. So we connect with Tico, we connect with FPL, we connect with with Lacucci, we we're all connected. So if there is a part of the grid, regardless of which company it is, if there is a problem and a voltage shortage, it affects everybody. And so everybody benefits, but it's it's a little more abstract and hard for us to s uh you know to say their benefit is exactly.
X. Their benefit is we are feeding them from a transmission perspective. They step that voltage down, they're feeding the distribution. As the load growth of the area and the grid increases, we need to increase the capacity to continue providing power to them at the quality that they're receiving today. So that so they're getting a benefit, but they are not the driver of this overall project. I just didn't want that to be misrepresented that it's with Lacucha.
Okay. Um
And I guess my regarding the road. Um
So I I find this a little bit strange and maybe it's just because I haven't been looking at this stuff uh that much lately, but um it does say here that it says that the portions of Smith Road are Pasco County owned right away. So where does that end?
And what what I find strange is that it says it um
Answer it, yeah.
So Smith Road, the County Road, comes uh south, it turns the bend, and it used to continue south, and that's no longer passable. So the county right-of-way ends right here, and the private satin leaf lane uh picks up here and continues west. If you were driving down there, you wouldn't notice you're on two different roads, but that's the way the ownership is.
Right, okay. Um Then I guess my question is probably more for staff, is why does this condition say however if said portions of Smith Road are no longer owned Bipasco County.
I can address that if you don't mind. So when we were meeting with the Satin Lane leaf owners, their concern was not so much primarily the paving, but also the security of that road because there's been looters back there. Um, there's been some folks that don't live there doing some things back there that have not been desirable with the the neighbors. And they were concerned if we pave that whole road, you're just inviting more people to come back there. And so they the the condition of paving. They did want paving, but it conditionally, if it could be gated. We've agreed to put up
a gate where Satin Leaf goes private because we can't gate Smith Road. It's pro it's public. So there was some conversations that we had with the county attorney as well that, well, what if Smith Road is vacated and then conveyed to private ownership? Then we can put the gate up north to give a little bit more security. Of course, that's not part of the special exception process, and so we've agreed. Agreed in good faith to continue those discussions with the neighbor, with the county to continue that. So the idea was if Smith Road goes private, the gate will go up north and then we'll pave it to private
standards. The residents also want to maintain the rural nature of their community so they're not looking for a giant county paved road if they can avoid it. So we're going to continue that in good faith going forward. So that's why the language has the if it goes private. that are public.
And I would add to that that probably is a good candidate for a vacation of a road because it doesn't appear to serve the public anymore. It mostly just serves a bunch of private landowners.
Right, okay. All right. That that clarifies that.
In Duke's willing to do that in good faith. I mean they only make five trips a a month, but they're still willing to put the expense in to do that with the neighborhood.
We couldn't commit in this application that that would be vacated though because that's a board decision for a different date. Right.
Got it. Um and just going back to the sliding of the of the project, uh Did you have conversations with with Lakcci over Moving it between your substation and theirs?
No, we've not had conversations with them uh about moving it up because again it doesn't work for us. And so for us that would have been a fruitless effort when we know and I understand not everybody believes that we can do that, but we know we can't build north. So it would have been a fruitless effort to sit down and ask for some sort of land swap or purchase to do something. And we cannot do.
Okay, so the if I understand it right, the main reason you can't move north is not because the land is low or high, it's because you can't cross lines because of of the danger of that. Correct. And clearance and the clearances that'll need to be correct maintained. So It's really that's really the reason you want to go the other direction. Absolutely.
And I would say if we could do it, we would do it. I mean the the landscape offer is over two hundred thousand dollars. The road paving the gates, all the things they're willing to do. If it was a simple thing to do, I don't think we would be here today.
Okay. Uh any questions about the landscape buffer?
Can I add to that I I guess if if that's the case, I mean you started out your presentation by talking about the two thousand and three hearing and I mean th there's a bullet there. The Florida Power substation is planned for expansion. Additional phases would be constructed in anticipation of demand. So I mean essentially what you're saying is is you knew you were gonna have to expand. Why was the substation laid out the way it's laid out now?
I I can't tell you I wasn't part of the design. I don't know what the constraints were at the time. All I can tell you was what's feasible, practical, and constructible now.
So I mean it it was really what it comes down to is is nothing more than poor planning. Well, and unpredictable
an inability to predict the future is what we're doing.
Well uh in in what in what case could you expand that existing substation to the north? 'Cause you said you planned for future expansion, but how could you have expanded that to the north? I haven't heard you guys say anything like that. I mean
But also keep in mind in 2003 a lot of these residents weren't there. So it'd be hard to predict the conflict.
So you thought you could possibly expand across Smith Road?
Sorry.
So I mean is that what you're saying?
So and I don't the layout of the substation was in a different uh slide. I don't know if uh we could get back to that, but if
No, this is their s this is not easy. No, sorry.
Uh if you could go back to the presentation we brought today, I think it's easier to explain and find the point, but um Yeah, a little uh further back.
So
that slide right there shows the aerial. That'd be great. And so again he here, th this is
the 69 kV yard, this is the 115 yard, and we're adding a 230 yard. If we were to expand the 69 kV, we could go north. But that's not what the load demand today and the projected load growth is calling for in a design. We wouldn't have known that 15 years ago we uh when uh the the original substation was designed. So now we know in order to meet uh our obligations of everything we have to meet, we have to build a 230 yard. So
not the not the 69. Again, if we just needed to expand that we could go north, but we can't. And this 230 yard has to tie into the 115, which is the southern yard here. Another reason why we can't put the two thirty up here and then have all the internal crossings plus all the line crossings for the transmission lines themselves.
So could could you just redesign that existing substation that you have to accommodate what you need?
We we could never take that substation out of service and rebuild uh new that's a critical piece of infrastructure. It it feeds, like we said with the Lapuji, it also feeds other areas of the grid. And so we We we couldn't wipe the slate clean and and start building new there. Nor would we build in another location to have all the cross connections in the higher impact than what we're proposing here. You know, from our perspective, balancing everything is the lowest overall impact design.
Excuse me. Can I can I say something in the regard across connection?
No.
Um
So is this is this gonna be your is this the last expansion you you're gonna propose there? So what you're saying?
So we we have documented from our transmission planning and that's the the part of our company that projects that this is the expansion plan for the next twenty-five years.
So it's it's basically the same thing they said in two thousand and three.
It's not actually. In two thousand and three we s we projected an expansion within six to ten years. Yeah
after construction. In the footprint that you had at the time.
I I'm not sure if it mentioned anything about the footprint at the time, but
this new property, so
So what are you going to do with all that excess property?
So we we've already agreed to a condition if you folks approve the permit that we're limiting the special exception. Permit just to the 1.27 acres. So we would not be able to expand at all on that property, that substation, without coming back to the commission. Not to staff, we would have to come to the commission. Right now, what we have planned for that property is just the enhanced landscape buffer. I know you heard from at least one owner in Satin Leaf that would like to look at a different use of that.
So instead of having The landscape buffer. What we've said is you know, we we Duke can't come into the county and say we want to do something less than we agree to with the landscape buffer. But if the owners in Satin Leaf are interested and they want to come to the county and everybody agrees that's in the best interest of the neighborhood, of course, we would do that. But right now what you have before you is our proposal and it's our proposal for the next 25 years.
So the the views that you showed of what things would look like and you know I was looking at this, I guess it's view four, and they're all the same. Um
The resident that spoke, he showed a different view that how he would project. So do you disagree with the fact that you would see these things sticking above the landscape buffering? Because it does look like you cherry-picked your views.
So just to be clear, we created the view here specifically at the request of this neighborhood because we We had a view up here, we had another view over here, we had another view over here. We certainly didn't, uh, and I understand the criticism, although I don't agree with it. At the last hearing, uh, you heard from the Meadow Point residents, several of them, and certainly their attorney, who specifically requested we create the bandage point from here. So that's what we did, and that's what you have in
front of you. So we made zero attempt to cherry pick, we were responding to a request from the neighborhood and their attorney.
So will you answer my question? What would you I mean, do you agree that they're gonna see This uh substation sticking above the
There there will be parts and if you look at the uh photo simulation you see there there I don't know if um I don't think it was in the gentleman's presentation, but the one that I handed out, it shows existing condition. at planting and at maturity. And the reason you don't see a difference between the uh second, third, and fourth is because the the the landscaping that's on the substation site itself will is specifically designed not to grow high enough that you can see it because then you would
have interference with our equipment. So you can see that there is a portion above that. What um Again, I would just go back to that. That was the exact vantage point we were requested with and not at a small expense. We had to fly people down here to take care of that. And this is not Photoshop cut and paste. This is very advanced 3D modeling. And so when they put that together, they they rebuild based to scale on the design.
Mm.
Well I think one of the big unanswered questions is what are you and it's not something that we're not really addressing is where are you going to run these new power lines? Because that's the critical issue I think for the neighborhood. That's that's what's gonna be most visible. Uh
understood. And so we have this existing corridor here. We have to get from here to here. W we know that. But as we had said at the previous hearing, we and we talked to the neighbors about this, we're at the conceptual engineering. I can't show you a photo simulation based on concept where w we don't even know the exact place on earth the structures are gonna go. I can show you that on the substation because that has been designed. This is the design. Um and we will at some point be able to show the neighbors
that. But our our normal process where we are is we don't get to final engineering until well after um we have the permit and close the uh final engineering on the substation and that's why we're here before you hoping we can move on to that next step.
Are those uh subic uh further meetings and hearings and location lines?
Are you talking about site plan approval? Site plan approval would typically be administratively approved by stuff. It wouldn't go through I believe there's a notice, they do notice the adjacent property owners. Is that correct? Coraline, somebody? Yes. So they do provide notice to the adjacent property owners when the site plan comes in, but it's not a public hearing.
I don't. But it would have to be approved by the staff.
It's staff approved. But if for some reason some adjacent property owner didn't like what staff approved, that could be appealed.
Going back to the landscape plan, the modified landscape plan. Does it indicate a that additional
Landscape, curve, a linear landscape near the driveway off Satin Leaf. Does it indicate anywhere what that's gonna consist of?
The I the landscape plan uh it does denote unfortunately I just can't read it uh from here, but it does denote exactly what the uh specific is.
I I just don't see anything on there where there's no there's no leader pointing to that landscaping. That's why I'm asking the question. There there's the leader that points to the existing canopy, there's a leader that points to the setback, and there's a leader that points to the proposed roadway improvements, but I don't see anything pointing to that.
I I again I could get you that information. I'm I'm I'm not the right one. I I know we have vegetation there, beyond that I can't tell you exactly what it is.
I mean to me that's that's a pretty critical thing. I mean I I wanna know what's there. There's a difference between a a twelve inch tall ground cover and uh what what kind of landscaping you're putting in there.
So now I can't really wait.
I I've been fighting my need for reading glasses, so I am struggling with I think it is down in the legend and and again I can get to the uh the specific information, but it's it's it's in line with what I do know from the landscape designers, it's in line and in concert with what we're uh proposing over here.
Yeah.
But there's there's a different slope and uh grade and everything there, so I think that's
Okay, so maybe you better ask question of staff. Does staff when this site plan comes in, Can you tell what landscaping needs to go in that location?
No, but hi if when you're reviewing the site plan for consistency with a special exception Are you gonna be able to know what needs to go in that area from this plan?
If we use this this is Coralin, if we use the pl if we if this plan is adopted as part of the special exception, then the answer is yes, we'll use this plan, if that was your question.
But do you know what type of trees or shrubs need to go in that the former gap area because that's what Mr. Gerard is asking about.
Yeah, I I just can't tell what that is. I don't I mean if there's some of those things in the legend says what it is.
Yeah, I think if you blow up the plan you can see what it's saying down there and to me it's looking like it's showing uh 18 to 24 inch, three gallon, 30 inches on center, and salt palmeadows, number 179 and number uh 586 down at the bottom if you blame. that up when you're looking at a site plan. That's just what I'm getting from it.
That's so I I'm told it's sand cordgrass. Um I can't tell you what that is, I don't know the name. Um or similar species. I I think most of these are written or similar species. So if if your county staff you know as long as it was uh compatible with um anything else, if your county staff was asking for something different but similar, I don't think we would have an issue with that.
I guess is
there a
reason why it's not the same thing as as as on the west side and the wraps around the corner there?
So the only thing I can tell you is uh because again I'm not the landscape architect or the designer, I know there are significant um uh slope changes over there. So I I don't know if that's why I mean it's something that uh in the stormwater pond I guess.
Yeah, it just looks like you're outside of the banks, but that's
Okay, and at the last meeting there was a discussion about the existing driveway to the existing house and there was a break there. Is that break still gonna remain and is everybody okay with that?
It'll have a a s uh small gate because you can see in these two access uh points are for the substation itself and because of the slope and the retention pond, we couldn't uh get back here and so far. for uh maintenance of this yard mowing and and landscaping that sort of thing that will will maintain this, which is right now this is the existing driveway to the existing residence. It's that's not showing up because it's under the tree canopy.
Okay. So
It looks to me like by this legend is it's a double row. And I think it
is.
Kevin's right. So you're talking, you know, eighteen inches high on top of an eight eight eighteen inch berm. So I I don't think that accomplishes much.
Well and I think it's worth noting that the attorney the former attorneys for the Meadow Point Association have reviewed this landscape plan and other than the request for the additional gap filler, which we've done, there have been no further suggested revisions to this landscape plan. by that association.
Well, it seems to me that the primary rejection from residents nearby is not necessarily that it's there, but that they don't want to see it. Yeah. I think you've done a minimal job. in buffering it. If you're talking about a 36-inch plant, I mean you're gonna you're gonna see a 10-year-old child. Yeah, you're not gonna buffer anything with a 36-inch plant. So I'm I'm very unhappy with the landscape
plan. Uh I think it's very minimal. You know, you got a huge project there, you're spending lots of money. I'm sure you're gonna make lots of money, that's fine. But residents have to be protected. No, we have to look out for the residents. And uh Yeah, I don't know how every else feels, but I'm not happy with landscape plan. You got most of your landscaping on the north side, which there there's nobody there. And uh You
know, I like the fact that you're gonna pave the road, I like the fact that you're gonna provide them a security gate. I think that's all good. Um you're doing some good things. Th the other thing I don't like is I don't like not knowing where the transmission lines are gonna go because You mean how we're gonna tell whether the residents are gonna be have that blaring in their face? You know, you're not obviously you're not gonna block a hundred foot pole. But when you look across
the land, you shouldn't see the base, that's for sure. And uh you need to keep the lines as far away from those homes as possible. And y you know, I know there has to be give and take on both sides, but I think You didn't you need to give a little more. That's my opinion.
So, Mr. Chair, the if Duke wants to voluntarily work with the homeowners on the lines, that that's up to them. But unfortunately, the legislature took away our authority to regulate the lines earlier in this legislative session. Um We used to have authority to regulate the lines, but we no longer have that authority. So your exclusive authority is to regulate the substitute.
Right.
So if the residents have a concern about the fact that that we no longer have authority to regulate the lines, they need to take that up with their legislators who changed the law earlier this year.
But that's not gonna help them right now. So
it's not, but I'm but I'm I don't want them to think that we're disregarding their concerns about the lines. We it's that that authority was taken away from us by the legislature.
But what we can do is we can you know make make certain requirements on these buffers uh on the site. So and uh so I'm I'm open to comments or suggestions from anybody up here.
You ready for a motion? Yeah, I'm ready. So I will move uh for denial. A second.
Any further discussion on the motion?
Well, so if you're gonna vote for denials and staff is recommending approval, you have to say which of the special exception criteria they did not meet. Okay, we usually have a list.
So I'll say number one uh is not and number four does not.
So four is obvious to me from your discussion about why you don't believe the buffering is insufficient, but if you're gonna rely on number one, I think you're gonna have to say what provision of the comm plan they don't comply with.
Well, I I have a problem with how they've positioned this thing on there. I mean I I honestly feel like you have a utility to the north, they're a utility, there's a lot of space in between. They they could design this thing, so it goes in between those two. It just seems to me like that makes common sense now. I don't know the um
Well you are so I think staff would have to analyze that. Um we do have compatibility policies in the comp plan. That you might be able to rely on. I just don't staff hasn't analyzed that. So if you're wanting to deny based on number one, I think we'd have to continue this so that staff could do a proper analysis of what common plan of policies they may not comply with. Your other alternative would be just to deny it based
on four.
Yeah, my concern with that is that um the defendability of our decision.
Well you you I mean you have you I mean you you and the board have discretion to say that their screening and buffering was inadequate. I mean uh you know that
I I think that's a legitimate basis to deny it as number four. I'm not saying there's not a you can't legitimately deny it based on one. What I'm saying is that you would need to cite what policies staff has recommended staff has found them consistent with the comp plan. So I'm not comfortable with using that as a basis for denial unless we identify the Complan policy that it's inconsistent with. Unless staff is prepared to provide that analysis now, are you?
No.
So I think they would need to research that um before the they could recommend you so that's up to you. If you want to continue it so that staff can do that research, um That's certainly within your authority to do that. Or you can recommend that it just be denied based on four.
That's your your call.
My my concern is this is excuse me.
Good Pete.
This is our our our third meeting on this. And from what what I really hear is that we're concerned on number four, basically, it's the landscaping of the area.
I also heard the fact that in 2003 uh there wasn't sufficient uh planning.
But this area has grown in the last three years. And the the electrical grid
needs to be updated and worked on. We need the power for this area. Whether you like it or not. Whether you prefer to have the landscaping improved, I can go along with that. They can come back here with uh A better landscaping plant. But as far as the power grid, they they indicated on several occasions, and we keep w we there are some who keep saying go to the north, go to the north, they have indicated they can't do that before safety reasons. I
had friends of mine that work for Con Edison and the power lines can be a dangerous area to work in. So I think us trying to consider or trying to motivate them or trying to do something to get them to move north. It is like trying to push a two ton rock up a hill with one person. It's not gonna happen. But I can't agree to the fact that maybe landscaping needs to be enhanced.
But we do need to move on this at some point in time. They're talking about uh I think what are my notes are? Uh next year, next November of 2018 is when this will come online.
By that time, we are gonna see a phenomenal growth in this area. We're gonna see homes come online, we're gonna see businesses come online, and we're gonna continue to see power outages during peak periods of time. So to deny this, based on landscaping. To me it's ludicrous. I'll I'll vote no one for the fact that we're gonna die into this. But
We do need to move forward with some type of plan. And I have I have in my notes here, uh six to ten years back when this was discussed, This area basically was a cow pasture. Wiregrass Ranch was just that. There were probably a couple thousand people here and probably 20 or 30,000 cattle. This area is growing. And we can stand here and sit here or do whatever we want and continue to say no to this plan. I can feel
for the residents. And to the residents I say, it was there before you showed up.
So
I indicated that I would vote no on it. That's what I will do.
So We probably need I'm not sure you have a motion. I know you made a motion for number one.
Right, but I I'm advising you that I that I don't think that citing number one is a legitimate basis unless you cite the specific Com Plan policy goal and objective that it's inconsistent with.
Right, so I'll amend my motion to uh uh move to deny based on number four.
I second that option.
Okay. So any further discussion?
Uh well let me just say before we vote that my My personal preference would be, I hate to say this, but to continue it again to come back with a better landscape plan. You know, because I agree that that We have to have the power. But we also have a responsibility to protect the residents. As much as we possibly can. And uh
Well I'll get to that in a
second. So
so so let me just comment on that. So if you were to deny this, obviously Duke would then have no opportunity to present to you a better landscape plan. Right. It likely would then get appealed by Duke to the board. They're that at that for that appeal it's limited to the record, so there's really no opportunity for them to give a better landscape plan to the board. So what would probably happen is if the board wanted to see a better landscape plan, the board would be forced to remand it back to you. To get a better landscape plan. So
I'm only pointing this out to you that that y you could do it, but it may end up back on your laps. Right. If if that's your main reason and Duke thinks they have a better landscape plan, they may just tell the board, We're prepared to give a better landscape plan, but the Planning Commission wouldn't let us. That's what just that's maybe what happens. So
Okay.
I'm just telling trying to predict the future of what's gonna happen here.
For for those that are concerned with the landscape plan, is the primary objection the gap, the the old gap that's filled in or is it No. It's more than that.
It's more than that.
It's more than just that little gap.
So, I mean you could and again I'm not telling you what to do, but you could continue it with the understanding that if it got continued again, the only testimony you would receive is on the landscape plan. So in other words you would not Here any other discussion, testimony that the your discussion at the continued meeting would be solely on whether the enhanced an enhanced landscape plan would be sufficient.
Okay. So based on that, then if if it does, let's say it comes back to us, um
We still weren't satisfied with it. Option one is now off the table to us.
No, because the other advantage of continuing is that staff could be prepared if you if you continued it and you were still inclined to deny it, staff hopefully by that time would have done the research to support at a denial based on number one.
My only concern when you deny that based on one today is DAF has not done that research.
Okay, so what? Probably
Chris. Well my question on that would be that if staff's done the research, then their opinion it's consistent. So how do they come back
and now? Staff has rendered an opinion it's consistent, however, It they can tell you that if you were inclined to find it inconsistent, these are the policies you should rely on. That's what they could do. I know yes, it's their opinion it's consistent, but they can also advise you, just like I would do as a lawyer, if you wanted to argue the other side, this is what you would do. Right. So th they they're capable of doing that.
I think that makes better sense that that we just continue this to another meeting. They obviously have heard the fact that several of us are not satisfied with the landscaping. They have the opportunity to beef it up considerably and then read it back to us. If it's we're not satisfied at that point in time, Then we have the grounds to say, hey, you've had four opportunities come before us. Landscaping is an issue that I hope you hear loud and clear. And you
say yes or no at that time. That makes sense to me.
So the only other recommendation I would make, and again, what you do is up to you, but um I'm not hearing that you've given them a lot of clear guidance on what is deficient about the current plan. So it may be that they asked to meet with you individually to go over that, or if you want to delegate one member of the Planning Commission to meet with them to separately go over what you think needs to be done to beef it up. That may work too, but if I were
them, I would since you haven't given them the specifics of what's wrong with it, I suspect they're gonna want to meet with you. So you either can all meet individually with them, or maybe you could delegate somebody who to be your spokesman about what needs to happen with this landscape plan. Uh your call what you do.
I think that's a good point. I that there needs to be more guidance. So yeah.
Okay, so is there any other discussion on the motion?
I think that we need to keep in mind too that this existing piece of property that they have, they can do what they want to do on that piece of property. It's not, you know, it's there. I mean they can do it. It's the new piece that they're trying to, you know, move this to. So, um Um nobody can stop them from that. And I and I'm I'm uh I mean we gotta have progress too, I agree. Believe me a hundred percent. I'm all I I feel for everybody on both sides, but you know, you have to have that progress
and you know if we're gonna vote tonight, you know, I'm I'm gonna vote no. So I'm gonna vote not to deny it as well.
So you unless the motion maker wants to withdraw his motion, you have a currently a motion on the floor to deny it based on number four. Right.
Yeah, I mean I'll I'll I I would um withdraw the motion um to continue it to then come back to us with an it sounds to me like you know if we're gonna deny it based on four an enhanced buffering plan on how to address this. And I don't want anybody to think that. Um No. I completely support the expansion of our utilities, you know. But for all these residents out here, we wouldn't need a
a new substation. I've lived here for forty eight years. So, you know, it's um the because of the growth that's coming is the reason why we need this. It it goes hand in hand. So I'm not against doing it. I just think that the whole way that they've they've done it, um Leaves a lot to be desired.
Let me just make a uh a comment in referring of what I have been listening here today. Moreover, also three times that we have been meeting and talking about the same uh topic here. In my opinion and one hundred percent, we are in a s area that is growing, it's growing really fast. We need to increase our utility to b basically fit the capacity that our needs. My problem about this is the lack of communication between the two parties. It's frustrated
for me after we have been discussing this several times that you two cannot get together in the proper way to have a a conclusion and try to get this resolved. I've so I don't see any kind of flexibility in both sides.
And in the same time, we move to Deny. I know I second that, but if we move to Deny just in an item number four, we're going to be tied just to the landscaping when there are so many items that need to be resolved here. So I kinda go go with the direction just to you two try to get together. And also we I agree with you uh in the idea to have some representation of the commission to to be sure that we have the clear guidance about
what the needs of landscaping to improve these plants need. And and I I I can attendance to that.
So are you making any motion to continue?
So yeah, I I Um rescinded my motion, but I'll I'll move to continue. To what to to uh when is the next date? Next date city date. Next date city date, yes.
The thirteenth, December thirteenth.
I won't be here then, so
I think my plans come together quite nicely then yeah. Well
It doesn't have to be to December thirteenth, the continuance. Uh all you know is thirty days is enough. So so the applicant wants to make a comment on the continuance. What's your question?
Just had more of a comment. Um, I think we're all a little surprised at this point that we're talking about the landscaping plan since we've been here three times, and our understanding is that the landscaping has been fully vetted. And our meeting with the Meadow Point Owners Association in their home on the 29th, the landscape was sufficient. And they had no further requests. The reason why the landscaping is a little shallow in that area is because that's where the lines come out, and you can't have large vegetation there interfering with the So that is a restriction that we're always gonna have, no matter how uh many additional you know, trees we put around the perimeter, but
that area where the lines come out you can't have conflicting lands.
Are you telling me that you can only have thirty six inch high vegetation under a big power pole?
You can have higher vegetation but but you can't have much of a
that's what you're implying. So you have to have a legustrum.
Where's the
We can have up to twelve feet and if that's a condition you folks would like to place, we'll we'll agree to that today. That's not our you know, thirty-six inches it we it can't grow more than twelve feet is is and if that's what you would like to put in there we would absolutely agree. Uh Um
And if that's a concern, I think we can agree to that today. I I don't think from our end that we're we're willing to take another continuance because we've fleshed out all the issues with all the owners. We've reached a consensus with Satin Leaf, and the remaining issues from Metaphor that we're hearing are the transmission lines in the north versus south concern that we've really um discussed. At length, there's really no resolution on that. We've done everything we can do in terms of landscaping, lighting plan, paving roads, adding gates, everything that can be done above the county's requirements, we're willing to do. But there are a couple
things we just can't do in terms of crossing lines and making safety concessions. And so, if you want to add a condition today. for the the additional landscaping in that corridor, then I think we'd be willing accept that.
M my apologies, I'm a little slow on this. Where where is it that you're talking about where the lines come out?
So I again I just have to give you the disclaimer, this is all con uh conceptual, so I can't tell you exactly where it's gonna go, but this general area here there would be lines, and this area here there would be lines. Because again, this is our existing corridor. There's already a 69 KB line that runs through here. We need to tap into that. So you know we've We've got to get from this side down and we have to get from this side down.
Okay, well assuming that your contours on your conceptual plan there are correct. That berm and that little gap that you filled in there. Where you're planting those is two foot below the top of bank of the swale. So I mean literally the the plants are eight, six inches below the top of bank. So you're gonna see twelve inches above the top of bank of that swale. That's what you're planting. Okay, so I I find it really hard to believe that that's as tall as you can provide underneath of those power lines which you said you haven't designed yet. But you know they're gonna come out there so you have to keep the landscaping down. I think
I don't like that excuse.
Yeah, which is why if if you wanted to say you you can put landscaping in here, you know, no shorter than twelve feet, or the species will, you know our our guidelines and what we have to meet is if it's within a corridor, it doesn't have to be exactly under the line, but if it's within the easement, the species can can grow at maturity can be no taller than twelve feet. That's yeah that's a hard. Yeah, that's why
I was asking the question of your where you where the easement was, because I thought the easement was where the existing power lines were. I didn't know you had an easement where you thought you may have to put 'em which you haven't designed yet per your presentation today.
So I again our our easement comes down here and then with the with the new lines they we have to tap into it. But that's east of that driveway. And then over here, because again in order to do this we have uh sixty nine KB that are likely to come down here. In our discussions with the neighborhood where we brought back to our design engineers to try to get that as far east as possible so it's not a very good thing. It's you know, wherever the lines are gonna go, as far away from the residences as possible. I just can't stand
here and tell you today it's gonna be exactly here or over here. Um but this is the we we don't have a whole lot of options unless we were to impact a whole other set of folks and and take
a Who
Who
owns the property to the south where you have to run the new lines? Uh the Homeowners Association?
Yeah, Standard Pacific that developed.
So they have to grant you the easement?
Or they can condemn it. They
have condemnation. Or you
can do condemnation. Right. Okay.
So again, I mean if if if if the concern is, you know, thirty six inches isn't adequate, um, we can go up to twelve feet and if that's a condition you folks want to put on, we'd agree to it. uh today. We'd but the what we're really hoping you don't do is continue it. So we're requesting a vote either way that you're inclined to vote.
So y you know, I'm gonna go back to the the first time that I asked it was like I think it was one of the first questions I asked was what type of um sighting study did you do to determine the options of where you could put this? And the answer was well we didn't do any because You know, we have a a a substation there now, we just want to expand the one we have. So, you know
I'm just gonna go back to the point that I don't know that, you know, this is yes, we need the expansion. I get that, but I don't know that this is the appropriate place for it. And so if, you know, based on that, I'm starting to lean towards the more the one option, but I would need some guidance from staff and the legal side to cite some things where it's not consistent.
So staff, do we have compatibility policies in the Comm Plan? Do you
There certainly must be somebody over in that r in this room that can find them.
Yes, there's compatibil compatibility um chapter in the comp plan.
Do you have a particular policy number that requires
Not right not right handy, no.
So
I mean I I'll I'll go back to say, you know, that Duke is saying, well That's where we want to put it. So we didn't study anything else to see what else it would what else would happen. So they didn't study to the north. They didn't study across the street. They didn't study anything. They just said we're gonna put it here and that's all there is to it. So, you know, now they're saying, Well, we can't move it 'cause of safety things. Well that probably is right, but I don't know that. I'm a financial planner for God's sakes. I you know,
I don't I don't know about that. But it seems to me like that, you know, they designed it in the first place, they can redesign it.
Uh well, I'm sorry I I'm an engineer but not this kind of engineer and the infrastructure's here. So if you go expand somewhere else, I get it, but you're gonna have to run lines and impact probably you're gonna be in the same exact area. So then you're gonna impact a bunch of other residences. So You know, I'm sorry, I d I just disagree with that. And I'm not voting on this unless there's a tie.
I disagree that that you can go find just find another place down the street that you're not going to impact other people as well. I mean this is a growing area. There's houses everywhere. And as a school planner, we struggle to cite our schools in places that are minimally impact residences. But at some point, as Peter said, you have to expand the infrastructure. in order to provide power to all these folks.
And and and if you look at this little drawing that they've got here too, and this is just me speaking my piece, they're trying to expand another 150 feet on the parcel, probably another hundred foot on the building. If they took that building and took that hundred foot and decided, oh, we're gonna ship that to the north, they're still gonna need all the transmission lines and everything else. It's not gonna matter. We're still gonna have to have the lines. And and I mean it you know, I'm just trying to think with common sense there is all I'm trying to do.
Yeah, well my my particular preference would be to add the requirement for the twelve foot landscaping. Mm-hmm. Minimum twelve foot landscaping. Let's do that. But I'm not making the motion.
David, we have your uh we have your section if you would like to hear it now.
Can you read it to me?
It's policy future land use one point four point six utility compatibility protect the integrity of existing neighborhoods from the effects, if any, of bulk electric transmission corridors. Natural gas pipeline easement and similar facilities By prohibiting to the maximum extent of the county's jurisdictional authority their location through or immediately adjacent to existent existing neighborhoods. When
you read it, I think there's another policy, and this is why I hate doing this on the fly, I'll be honest with you. Oh I think it's three point three point two that talks about substations having adequate buffering and being proper I mean
I'm not comfortable that staff has thoroughly analyzed all of the compliant policies that could be relied on to deny this application. I mean I'm not it
And I'm not sure it's fair to them to ask them to try to do this on the fly. I'm sorry.
Yeah, I'm gonna move to continue to the Dade City meeting in January of twenty nineteen. I don't know what the date is, but
The date is the tenth.
Gotcha. January tenths.
We have a second.
My my main problem with that is just I don't know that we've given 'em enough direction to what I mean, continue it to what so we can hear the same thing again. I don't know that they've heard enough to come back to us.
Well. I think David had a had a good idea if you want to do it that way is you know, identify somebody on this board to meet with them and make sure that we have a plan that we can all live with.
I could live with that motion and I would suggest that the chairperson be the representative for us. That way we it's Yeah, what I heard is you don't want it this to be continued, correctly?
We would prefer a vote one way or the other. We would have to do that.
Up or didn't vote. You want you want this to come to net. So can can can we can we approve this based on the fact that we can uh select one person to be our
representative? Not really, no. Yeah. So I'm
not sure.
So so that that concept only worked if you were going to continue. If you If you're inclined to approve it, you can approve it with an additional condition. Um Now I guess I suppose you could prove it with the condition that the landscape plan be brought back to the Planning Commission.
In other words, you could prove that you could prove it the special exception, but require that the landscape plan, final landscape plan be approved by the Planning Commission. That would be odd. We wouldn't normally do that, because normally the landscape plan gets approved by staff, but if if the only way you're willing to prove it today is if you see the landscape plan again, that's how you would do it.
Okay, so we had a motion. We did not have a second on that motion. So it died for the lack of a second. Is there a new motion?
Uh I motion that we have I'm not sure of the wording. So I may see some help on that. That we approved uh Duke Energy to move forward with the substation. And the condition that they bring back to the Planning Commission a enhanced landscaping uh plan from the modified one that we saw today. Would would that uh be sufficient wording?
I think that's probably I mean staff's gonna have to probably modify some of the other conditions to make it clear you're not approving this plan and that you'd be bringing have to bring They'd have to bring back to you a new plan prior to them submitting a site plan approval. Does that work, Coralin? Help somebody help me? Is that would that condition work?
So it's either that if that's what The Planning Commission prefers that they see the landscape plan before they submit officially for their site plan review to current planning, then yes, otherwise it would be let them submit for site plan review and just bring the landscape plan back here for your upgrade.
The planning commission is gonna want to see and approve the plan before they ever submit another because otherwise they're sort of married to whatever they submitted, I think. Okay. So
sure.
I think the concept would be that you would it would come back to the the landscape plan would come back to the planning commission before they submit their site plan approval.
Yes.
Is that that Is that what you're saying? Yes. And with the other modified conditions that staff presented today with the road?
No, yes. Okay. Yeah. It's not negotiable there.
Okay, so uh we have a motion. Do we have a second?
So I guess I'd like to ask the applicant under well, I guess you need a second before you go to discussion. Go ahead.
Do we have a second? I'll second it. All right. Okay, for discussion.
So I'd like to ask the applicant. if they're okay with that condition.
We're okay with that condition.
Okay, so we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor of that motion? Sigma saying aye.
Aye. Aye.
Aye.
Opposed? Aye. Aye.
Can you
do can you do this a roll call vote, please?
And just before you do the roll call, if you're against the motion, please say nay so I think it's a little clearer. Okay.
I'm for the motion.
Yeah. Nate.
Hi.
Hi.
Nate.
Okay, so the motion carries.
So the only thing I would add for clarification just for the public is since the landscape plan will have to come back to the planning commission, planning commission acts at notice public hearing, so that means the applicant is going to have to notice those residents when that landscape plan comes back to the planning commission.
I just wanted to make sure the applicant and staff or and the public are all aware of that.
Okay.