Public hearing consent items P41-P46 and Harvest Hills modifications
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 Board of County Commissioners, Mar 7, 2023
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 Board of County Commissioners, Mar 7, 2023
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 26m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 99% of 146 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
P forty one is PD twenty three zero two two four. This is a conditional use request in the name of Patricia Weber Bestmeyer, North American Towers LLC EarthCom services. This is a request to withdraw the item and no further action is required.
Okay. Next item P forty two.
Item P forty two was published in the Tampa Times on October nineteenth, twenty twenty two.
PDD 237665 in the name of REMA Investments LLC Apple Enterprises. This is a request to continue the item to the April 4th, 2023 Board of County Commissioners meeting in date city.
May I have a motion to continue P forty two. Second.
All in favor say aye. Aye. That's so you m that's a motion to approve the continuance. Well correct. To approve the
continuance. Okay. Motion to approve the continuance.
Second. All in favor to continue, say aye. Aye.
Good catch.
I think you're okay. Next item, P43.
Item P forty three was published in the Tampay Times on January 4th, 2023.
This is PDD 2375448, a zoning amendment in the name of Harvest Hills North, Villages of Pasadena Hills, Master Planning and Development. It's formerly known as Harvest Hills. The level of consulting LLC has a proposed substantial modification to previously approved MPUD to separate it into multiple smaller MPUDs and allow trans. Of the following entitlements, 798 residential dwelling units and 167,811 square feet of non-residential uses on approximately 319.3
acres. On this item, there is a couple, a few corrections. In your background summary, alternative analysis: the location of the project should be on the north side of Prospect Road at the intersection. Section of Prospect Road and Hamcart Road. Additionally, the parcel identification numbers that were provided were actually for Harvest Hills South. So the corrected parcel ID numbers, and this will all be provided to the clerk's office. I'm going to read them into record. Are 13-25-20-0000-00100-0000
comma. eighteen dash twenty five twenty one dash zero zero zero zero dash zero zero one zero zero dash zero zero zero zero zero comma 18 25 21 000 00300 000 and 18 25 21 000 00400 000 again that will be uh provided to the clerk's office as a correction
Okay.
And the request is to find to approve it with conditions as included in your packet. This comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions from the Pasadena Hills Planning and Policy Committee who met on 118-23 and the Planning and Development Department.
Okay. Is there anyone here to speak against this item?
I have no one signed up and no one on Wedded's for this item.
Okay. We'll leave it on consent. Uh
Commissioner Mariano?
Mr. Starkey.
Um two questions. Um one is for Mr. Pitos. If I was going to bring up our discussion yesterday of the T and D ordinance, which one of these numbers is the best one for me to bring that up?
Because I wanna bring it up once.
Uh Nicaragua's Peter's planning development. You're referring to the to the harvest hills, yes. 'Cause
there's three three of them, right?
Yeah, th they're associated with with each other, being that they were Yeah, the Harvest Hills Commons is uh is geographically separate from the North and South M P and D's, but they're all basically in the same cloud of matter. So it doesn't yeah, it doesn't really you can address it to either, all of them.
Well, it's just c it's just a statement in general, but I wanna because we have sunshine I need to discuss things correct very quickly with our board. So I so I mean I wanna pull one of them on for discussion, I guess.
Mr. Chairman M is is the item Are any of these T and D? Or are they all T and D? Well, no.
That's n n um no one's following that ordinance. That's okay. I wanna pull this one off for discussion. Taking off consent.
I'll
do it this way.
Okay, we're pulling P forty three.
Pulling 4443, now we've got a PIMP44.
So um sorry
go ahead sorry
talk about approved publication.
Item P forty four was published in Tampa Bay Times on January 4th, 2023. Thank you.
P forty four is P D D twenty-three seven six zero four it's Harvest Hills South Villages of Pasadena Hills Master Planning Development formerly known as Pas as Harvest Hills level of consulting LLC substantial modification to a previously approved master planning development district to separate it into Multiple smaller MPUDs and allow for a transfer of the entitlements as follows: 759 residential dwelling units and that 102,073 square feet of non-residential on approximately 116.3 acres
comes through you with a recommendation of approval with conditions from the Pasadena Hills Planning and Policy Committee. We met on 118 of 23 and the Planning and Development Department, and the conditions are as included in your agenda packet.
Okay. Is there anyone here to speak against this item?
See no one no one will leave it on consent.
And I have no one signed up or on WebEx for this item.
Okay, thank you. Next item P forty five.
Item P forty five was published in the Tampay Times on January fourth, twenty twenty three.
This is PDD 237605. It's a zoning amendment, Harvest Hills Commons, Villages of Pasadena Hills, Master Planning Unit Development, Level of Consulting LLC. It's a substantial modification to reduce the number of entitlements from 470 dwelling units to 276 dwelling units. Comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions as included in your agenda packet for the Planning and Pasadena Hills Planning and Policy Committee, who met on 118 of the U.S. twenty three and the Planning and Development Department.
Is there anyone here to speak against this item? Anyone on WebX?
There is um no one on WebEx with this item.
I think I think my question's important about these 40 foot lots. I don't know. Uh I I but just wondering your place to just
You wanna pull? We can pause.
Yeah, let's k I just want to talk about these.
So what'd you do with that?
So for clarification we're pulling P forty three, P forty four, and P forty five? Yeah. Thank you.
For discussion? Okay. So last Last one on consent is P forty six.
Item P forty six was published in the Daily Times on November twenty-third, twenty twenty-three.
PD237678 is a zoning amendment in the name of Margie A. Tingley. It's for a zoning for a change in zoning from C3 Commercial Light Manufacturing District with a specific use for data processing to a C2 General Commercial District.
And it was actually 27 of 23. That correction has been state um submitted to board records. The applicant on this item has also voluntarily agreed to a deed restriction, which is included in your agenda packet, but shortly is to have a minimum of 10,000 square feet of office uses, prohibiting car washes, gas stations. Drive-thru restaurants and standalone RV and boat storage to allow self-storage facilities, um, provided that they're set
back a minimum of 250 feet from the 50 State Road 52 right-of-way, and not allow RV and boat storage as part of the self-storage facility, and to also stub out the property to the west. So, this comes to you with a recommendation of approval from the Planning and Development Department and the Planning and the Pasco County Planning Commissioner Yeah.
Okay. Is anyone here in in up to speak in opposition to this item?
I have no one signed up for this item and no one on WebEx.
Okay.
Mr. Chairman Mariano. Mr. Chairman, if I can ask the commissioner, so do you intend to modify 43, 44, and 45, or do you just wish to have a discussion?
Uh um I I want to be sure we're not tying our hands on something that the the builder developer may wanted to.
So I would let the commissioner have her discussion on those items and they may be able to go back in? May be able to go back on consent from what I'm hearing. Go ahead.
I want to be sure because I'm looking at the diagram that's presented here. And um so so I would move to approve that I do.
Oh now? Now oh okay so I guess we'll see whether we can I don't know if I need Joel or Terry, but um so the you know we have a T and D ordinance and for our new board members, T and D's traditional neighborhood development Okay. builds walkable communities and it Typically has the rear loaded. houses. Um and you know we we went with the forty foot lots. If you wanna have exit mount you gotta put the
um Just You gotta rearload it, push the house up front and put the parking in the back, and then you don't have that parking issue on the sidewalk and it makes for a much nicer neighborhood. Um I I know that V OPH has been exempted from the TO TND ordinance, uh but uh I'll tell you our TND ordinance is really bad. Even my brother-in-law who's a TND national specialist would never use it. Um and no, I don't think we've really had any takers because it's very
onerous and expensive um the way we put the rules in and and and what our requirements are. And I don't think our administrator knew this until yesterday. Um so uh I know we're gonna work on fixing a lot of those elements so that it makes it um better, a better product. My my understanding is is that this developer is interested in bringing in some of those elements to his developments, uh his villages.
And you know you need density around a village center to help all the commercial retail be successful. But when I when I looked here and I didn't notice this before, I'm seeing if you look on page do you guys have the do you have the command?
No, we don't have it.
Uh okay, if you put forty-three up, I don't know what page this is. This page Yeah. If you can put that up there, it shows the typical layout for the forty foot lots. And it's it's the standard I it's a twenty foot side twenty foot driveway in the front, fifteen feet in the back. Um for single family detached. Are we are we If
we pass this like this, does he have to do that or can we modify that for a rear-loaded
product? Let me let me take a stab at all that. Um and and briefly summarize it. First, as as you pointed out, uh Joel two um Land use consultant for the applicant. As you pointed out, VOPH has always been treated differently because it is a specific special planning area with specific design guidelines and requirements that frankly are above and beyond what the rest of the county has. So it already has its design
structure to ensure that you have these concentric villages. that are more dense in the center and then the density reduces as you go to the edge of the village so that there and there's even an open space buffer area between villages where there's no no housing development. Two. Updates ago approved by the board, by this board, you're correct that the TND requirement was was expressly eliminated
from VOPH for all the reasons you gave. So as we sit here today, there is no mandatory TND requirement, but there are still these comprehensive plan guidelines as to how these villages are to be designed. Um The entitlements that are in these three MPUDs are not new entitlements. These were all approved 10 years ago. So this particular applicant is not asking for any new entitlements. All they have done is break this massive MPUD
into three distinct geographic areas and allocate the existing approvals to those areas. This is nothing new. Uh VOPH when you, and this is the last step, is last summer when we worked out your initial effort to control design of 40-foot lots, uh, and that was negotiated with the Builders Association, we expressly agreed to exclude VOPH from that for three
reasons. One, it already has its very Specialized design criteria. Number two, we did agree, we did agree to apply the architectural controls, the monotony controls, the on-street parking. uh controls. We did voluntarily agree to apply those. So one thing that these three imputees do, which they did not have originally, is this applicant has voluntarily added those architectural monotony controls and parking controls
into these three. So you are getting those by him doing the update. Now here's what Here's what Mr. Galvin, this applicant, has agreed with staff to do. In fact it was his idea. He suggested that since he's likely to be the very first one in a major way to kick off these projects in the OPH, he actually suggested that his design team have a planning, a design charrette. with staff which any one of you it'll be a workshop, any one of you'll be welcome to attend. But he
wants to sit down and work on the concepts for okay, how do these guiding principles apply? When we start laying out these village centers and we start laying out these projects, what are the streetscapes, how are things configured, and how does this work? So he has pledged to do that and wants to do that. So I guess my point is They have the right to use forty-foot lots. This board has previously, you know, reaffirmed that as late as last summer. Uh but it comes
with the strings attached that you've got to have these design controls. So the short answer is he's happy to have that design shred, have staff and commission input in that, and work out an agreed approach on these plans. But uh no one is going to commit to TND, you know that. Uh but if there's a modified version of that, if a product can be designed That makes sense that the developer can afford to build and that helps facilitate these building centers, he's happy to work on those
concepts with staff and frankly will be the leader out there in doing so. Yeah. Which will then establish a standard, if you will.
So when you talk about parking restrictions, are you talking about the length of the driveway or what else are you talking about?
Well, I think everything's on the table. What we've already agreed to is the condition, the standard condition that I think Commissioner Oakley initiated and staff worked out with a regulation of Own Street parking that basically requires the HOAs to control and enforce that so that the people aren't parking there and that the cars are not across sidewalks. But yes, the short answer is a big part of the problem is making sure those drivers. driveway links are sufficient that people aren't parked across sidewalks
and aren't parked into the streets. But all those things they're happy to discuss that.
M Mr Hang on a second. Mr. Two, you haven't sworn, correct? Yes sir. Sorry.
Um so So you know I I wish we hadn't gotten rid of the TND, but I'm telling you our TND ordinance was really bad. Um I I hear we might have a pretty progressive developer here, which I'm excited about, and he's doing a charrette. Um I would encourage us to attend. This is the first real I think village that's coming in, is that right?
Yeah, it'll be right. Under under the real original concept, this will be the first meaningful development of V OPH that actually gets launched. And by the way, the same developer is the same one that's going to be building all those utilities and roadways under the other agreements we've approved in the last two months.
So one of the in in discussions yesterday with administrator and uh uh planner uh Um Terry, um, you know, some of the thoughts that we've had and I don't know if these already apply to V O P H I can't remember. Is to incentivize the rear loaded um product um where you where the parking goes in the back and then you have on street parking, you get a lot more parking in a community that way. Um but One of the discussions we've had, and I've
had it with you on Newport Corners, is the ability to add what's called an accessory dwelling unit. Um in the back we have been long leaf all over the place. I think some of our county attorneys rented some where you get a little granny flat or mother in law suite or something and um we wouldn't count it as the d uh the towards density um wave impact fee because it's can be considered workforce housing and you know we're working on I and I I really want the developer to hear this, um working on these incentives to um um
entice a better community than if you can picture streets and streets and streets of forty foot lots with garage and door in the front and parking You know, if you have a single car garage you're gonna only be able to fit one car unless you're using the garage and I haven't It's hard to find a person that uh a family that only has the one car. So picture rows and rows of that versus the rear-loaded product, which is in my mind so
much better. And I also would hope that uh streets would be broken up with quadruplexes and different varieties of products so it's not a monotonous You know, Southern California look and rows and rows of the same house but it's painted a different color with a different color garage door. So I'm just really hopeful that what we've done at BOPH becomes something really special and by taking out some of the stuff that we did last year, which I understand why we did it, it
was not a good ordinance. We've shot ourselves a little bit in the foot and I'm hoping we can use a carrot to get some of this good the product back in. So that's all I wanted to say. And
we agree that that's a good approach.
I just wanna add to it, we had talked about it and I was living while I was building my new home, I was living in a Fitchfoot lot position and People park on both sides of the road. If you got a twenty foot road. That doesn't leave but room from one vehicle lane to go through there. I had somebody I was moving out of my house last week and I had someone coming toward me There was nowhere for me to pull over to let them buy. They had to pull over and let me get by before they could come down the road. And
if that was gonna this product's gonna end up like that Then we really don't want that in our our county. So I mean it's um So if you're not having any street parking, that's great, but are you putting in extra parking somewhere for some of these people? Because they're gonna have more than some of them will have more than two cars.
And that's exactly those issues are exactly what Mr. Galvin wants to work through in the design charrette, because we agreed that flexibility and product, particularly to get a little unique in the village centers, that's how you can create the village center look that you've always always wanted without then requiring the density as you fan out, you know, from from the village center. So we have no disagreement over any of these design concepts. And he's happy to participate in that that design process and
have a charret on it.
And these ho these houses are for sale, right?
Yes sir.
And uh you know we're just for I don't know who Mr. Galvin is back there, but um which one's Mr. Calvin. Um we we are working on um making the alleys cheaper too and and uh you know m more realistically priced because I know that's part of the issues that have been there for um a traditional neighborhood development in this county is what we've been requiring them to build since we are builders of
less expensive to construct.
Yeah did
I say it wrong? You said cheaper.
That uh our fire marshal is not gonna But so we know we have we'll we know we have work to do, but I just want you to know we we'd like to work with them to achieve something
like what it was originally intended
to be.
And they're happy they're happy to try to work with you so they set that standard and they do create it is a unique opportunity since they're the first ones out of the box. Of any you know material magnitude. So
let me go back to my question. And you guys see it here on the screen, and Joel, it's up there, the diagram that's in here.
I mean, that is intended simply to depict as your code requires. We have to sh we have to acknowledge that for each lot width, we acknowledge what the setback requirements are. That's that's directly from the land development code. So that applies in any case. Doesn't tell you how the subdivision is going to be laid out, you're going to get those plans. Those plans are going to have to come in and they're going to have to meet the design requirements of the DOPH code. This is just an example that for a 40-foot lot, this
is the maximum building footprint that can be on there and still comply with your setbacks. So I mean that that's just a generic loop. Okay.
I so if if our um applicant did want to do a rear-loaded product, he's not held to this. No, no. They doesn't have to come in here to change anything. Correct. That's what I want to make sure.
Well I can't imagine I can't imagine staff would make you amend the zoning to do that. I mean if they apply, if they approve or
whatever
comes in. Right. I just didn't want it to be stuck with that. We don't want to have to be amending zonings either to
Because I can tell you
I believe
Yeah, our I d I believe this commission doesn't want a county full of that.
Th these are the quote minimum standards, so you can always do more. Now, you know, one thing you have to do is you have to you have to allow those accessory drawing units, which you know we have in Connected City. You know, to an extent. But that's something that you know you probably need to address.
So is that not addressed in V O P H? 'Cause we did it in Newport Corners. Um And
to my knowledge that has not been specifically addressed in V O P H but it's also not prohibited at V O P H.
Okay, well I I mean I I think we want that.
So I mean that's if if that's a product you want, that's something that would be a great topic for the design character to be honest with you.
Something else would be good for the design shred I've heard about the fired truck lanes coming
in and
coming out.
So we
can look
at that too. Exactly. That's the issue with the rear loaded alleys.
This may be the ultimate time to actually make these changes that we need to do to adjust it, to adjust the code to make it easier to have a great development 'cause we we I do like the rail loaded project. It does work much, much better.
But I think that would be Mr. Galvin's goal. What we would hope for is that the coming out of the design sharect would be some type of policy memorandum that PD D adopted for V OPH. and that the board obviously has to prove and that these would be, if you will, kind of design guidelines, which you clearly have the power, you know, to adopt. And and that's part of the trick, is we gotta get the fire marshal and everyone else on the same page
How much time do you think we need for this for the charrette?
How much time
do you think we need with the charrette?
Well I that charrette needs to be a you know a half day process, a two or three hour process.
I think it's worthwhile. Okay. Alrighty. Any more discussion on these items?
Nope. I would move to approve.
So publicly. Let me just go back to the line.
Hm. Let
me just go back on one by one. That works. So item P forty three, is there anyone here to speak against this item?
I have no one signed up and no one on WebEx.
P forty-four, is there anyone here to speak to this item?
I have no one signed up in person and no one on WebEx.
With that consent. And P forty five, is there anyone here to speak to this item?
I have no one signed up in person and no one on WebEx.
Okay. All right, so that'll be the consent agenda.
Move approval. Okay.
Have a motion a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay. Thank you very much. Good discussion. P forty seven.