P48 Oakley Junction C2 commercial rezoning
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
The source document
The county’s agenda for 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 6m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 88% of 33 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Second. Ms. Brathic. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Item P forty eight.
Item P forty eight was published in the Tampa Bay Times on January eighteenth, twenty twenty three.
Believe in divine, planning and development. Um item P forty eight. PDD 23-7686, in the name of Oakley Junction AGLLC / Oakley Junction, is a zoning amendment from AC Agricultural District to C2 General Commercial District. The subject site is located on the northeast corner of Oakley Boulevard Road and Old Pasco Road.
This is a look at the hurdle view.
The surrounding future lanes use to the north is Res 3, Res 6, and Mixuse. To the south and east is Mixuse, and then to the west is Res 6 and Mixuse. The surrounding zoning for the site, to the north is AC, AR, R1, and MF2, to the east is AR, to the south is AC, and to the west is AC and R1. The subject site is currently undeveloped on approximately 1.98 acres. The applicant proposes
to develop the property in conformance with C2 General Commercial District standards for development. The applicant has volunteered a deed restriction, which will limit the maximum square footage for commercial/slash retail uses on the property to 22,000 square feet.
Access to the property is from Old Pasco Road, a county maintained collector road with approximately 130 feet of right-of-way, and Oakley Boulevard, a county-maintained local road with approximately 90 feet of right-of-way. And the future land use for the proper property is mixed use under the comprehensive plan. This is coming with a recommendation for approval from Planning Commission and Planning Development Department. I'm here if you have any questions.
Okay. Any questions for staff? Okay. Anyone from the public like to speak to this item?
Uh I do have one person signed up.
Um
I do not have
their name.
I want to see from the applicant.
Yes. Good afternoon, Barbara Wellhead, 6327 Grand Boulevard, Newport Ritchie, 34652. Representing the applicant, pretty straightforward. We're sitting at the corner of Old Pasco Road and Oakley Boulevard in a mixed-use land use, your most intense and dense land use. So this is where in pursuant to your vocational criteria in your comprehensive plan, this is where commercial. locates along these types of roads in this location. So I think staff did a very
good job of going through uh the application and uh we're here to answer questions. I have my client and our traffic engineer. Let's see what the public comment is and we can address from there. Thank you. Okay.
Any any questions the app again? Okay. All right. So this is a public hearing?
Yep, I had one person signed up. They didn't provide their name. The organization is Baith Baith Baptist Church and street address is Smoke Tree Lane, I believe. Okay. You could state your name and address and then whether or not you've been sworn.
Yes, I'm Sean Herhold, uh [address removed] and yes I've been sworn in.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Alrighty, so we do have uh a few concerns. I am the uh school administrator of the property just uh alongside of the two lots, the two parcels in question here. And in our opinion, uh Oakley Boulevard is not ready for an increase in traffic, especially not right in front of our school there, right in front of our church and our school. We would be concerned for the safety of our students. We think having A general commercial lot right here on this land with access to Oakley Boulevard is kind of troublesome for the traffic.
And in conjunction with the traffic concern, we would have a concern with specific high traffic businesses that drive people there. Businesses or restaurants with drive-throughs, gas stations, or even trailer parks could seriously raise. traffic and safety concerns right in front of our school. Also added foot traffic is a concern. We seem to have enough people wandering aimlessly around or near or on our property and
our school property. And so we'd just be concerned with any type of business that may draw more of that particular kind of individual near the vicinity of our school. And so I just wanted to make our concerns public and state them for your consideration.
Okay.
Is there anyone else from the public like to speak to this item?
And I have no one signed up on WebEx for this item.
Okay. Back to the applicant?
Thank you. We did go through a traffic review in connection with the rezoning and we meet all of your criteria. Mike Razor can um discuss that more if you have any specific questions. We have to go through access management review at the time of site plan. We know what the use is. We're at the zoning stage now. And um there is a appears to be a wetland in between our property lines, where this property line is, and then moving towards the east of where the school facility is and it's wooded there now. Um We don't intend
on drawing individuals in. And um
It is a a good location for commercial. It's exactly what your code says and uh we'll be good neighbors.
Any questions of the applicant?
Time we'll make a motion. Move approval.
Okay.
Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Motion passes. Five votes.