PC-4 Iqbal Groves rezone to RMH, 121-unit deed restriction
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, Mar 5, 2020
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, Mar 5, 2020
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 13m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 100% of 76 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
I am PC four.
Good afternoon. Christina Acosta, Planning and Development. Item PC four is a request in the name of Iqbal Groves Inc. to rezone approximately 38.75 acres from AC, Agricultural District, to RMH, Mobile Home District.
The property is located on the south side of Clinton Avenue, about a quarter mile east of US Highway 301. The surrounding zoning is a mix of agricultural, residential and entitled commercial uses.
Just a look at some of the surrounding zoning. Uh from the west and the north, the site is bordered by the city of Dade City. Um just to give you an idea of what some of that zoning is, uh immediately to the west is uh entitled commercial and to the north is their medium density residential zone. Uh the only comments we received from Dade City were that the applicant would be required to enter into a d a utility service agreement for water and sewer. Future
land use is res six, but as Denise stated earlier, uh the applicant has voluntarily offered a Uh deed restriction limiting the site to 121 units to address any possible issues related to density that puts the site uh just over three units per acre.
Access to the site is from Clinton Avenue. In addition, Pasco County has identified a future vision road that extends from US 98 North to the approximate midpoint between US 301 and Old Lakeland Highway on Clinton Avenue.
This comes to you with a recommendation of approval?
And I'm here for any questions.
Any questions from anybody here on the The applicant present?
Thank you. Shelley Johnson, [address removed], and I have been sworn. Um I'm here to answer any questions. I'm not really sure what the concern is, but I'll listen to it and try to answer it the best I can. can. Okay. From I know there's somebody here that wants to speak.
Comments from the public?
Thank you, gentlemen. Uh my name is Luther Goodwin. My address is [address removed]. And I'm here today out of concern about the future development of this proposed property. My wife and I have had the um opportunity to be neighbors on the south end to this property for over 50 years, knowing both previous owners of that property. We've enjoyed the peace and quiet that
this the buffer has afforded us for those many years. My number one concern, an immediate concern today, is what changes are being considered for the use of the land by the potential buyers if approved by the various boards. Number two concern is, and I think she may have just um Mrs. Johnson may have just answered it, was um if someone could
give me the uh egress and ingress point to this property. And of course our main concern is the continued privacy. For the future of our own neighborhood that adjoins those properties for the years to come. I'd like this to be a part of today's records, an official record. I'd like to get some type of response from concern number one and concern number two, perhaps from Mrs. Johnson, if I could. Thank
you.
So we're doing um single family attached. Uh I I think there was maybe a concern we were gonna do mobile home. That's what they're planning on doing. Again, it's a Euclidean So it's not an M P D, we don't have plans or anything like that set. Um but the intent is to do the single family detach, which is why they did the deed restriction to the one twenty one. Detach. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm s I I have a really bad toothache today. And that's all I'm really thinking about right now. But um no, so that's what they're doing. They're doing the single family, detached, 121.
They're agreeing that the due restriction. Obviously they have a res six, so they can do actually do s a lot more six units to the acre. Um the other question was access management. Um when they go in for engineering, planning, site plan, construction plan, all that good stuff, as you all know, is when a lot of that stuff was dealt with access management and stuff, especially at a stage like this where it's a Uclide. in zoning so versus an MPD. So that answers those questions. But that will all be addressed and you'll be publicly noticed on a lot of that stuff and when they come in brand new information.
So Shirley?
Sure.
Thank you. If you're representing to this gentleman and the Planning Commission that it's going to be single family detached, your deed restriction doesn't really say that. It just says a maximum of 121 residential units. So if you're committing that it's going to be single family detached, you would need to modify that deed restriction.
Yeah, I don't mind adding it and identifying it as single family. units at all. I don't mind that at all. Because the reason it got put that was because of the transportation and we had to get to one twenty one to get under an under anything where we were triggering thresholds and stuff, so So I'm fine with that. If they want to add that language I don't have an issue with that. Hello?
Okay, and then I guess my other question is for Dap. Since he brought up access, the The study that's being done to realign ninety eight, does it impact this property at all?
Because I know there's been some conversations about realigning ninety-eight so it lines up with Clinton.
Maybe us who knows or
Peep the aerial back up. Mm-hmm.
So the issue is that right now Clinton You have a jog between Clinton and ninety eight when you're trying to go east west and then eventually so there was money allocated from the state to redesign that intersection so that ninety eight would connect directly into Clinton. And my question is Hm. Is it is there any discussion of going through this pro I know
you mentioned the Vision Road, does it go through that property or not?
Yes.
Okay, so right where the arrow is pointing here, this extra section here, this is also this is also owned by the applicant, the vision road is going to intersect just about right here.
Okay, but where it goes from what is that vision road?
What where does where
does
the vision row go?
Um
I'm gonna try to bring it up.
It'll extend from US ninety eight north to that midpoint on um Between three oh one and Lakeland Highway on Clinton.
So so it doesn't I I'm not our time picturing what you're talking about, so it didn't
Well I'm I'm hoping that Denise will be able to pull up a picture but yeah.
Okay, that worked. So is that the road that's going to c connect to ninety? Is that the Yeah, I've
been ninety
eight. But i is that the realignment and ninety eight that they're talking about, or is that just a different vision road?
Yeah.
Okay. We don't I don't think you have the people here that can answer this question. I'm just saying before this gets to the board, you all need to make sure that this is this property is not impacted by that. We have that ninety-eight realignment.
'Cause I I'm understanding the state allocated like a million dollars to realign that study the realignment of that intersection.
And I don't know where that stands but Yeah.
the applicant deserves to know whether the that potentially is going through this property.
Pardon me?
Something like that in the last year.
I don't know if the D L R T P would have that level of detail. I mean that's why they're doing a P D and E a route study to determine the route of that realignment.
It may be that the property this property's not affected at all, but I
But Essene, you don't need to answer this now. I'm just asking that before it gets to the board somebody needs a core name with project management.
I did high.
Mrs. Asin again. Uh I have not looked at that option. that whether the align realignment is actually the ninety eight realignment and the money being allocated.
Yeah, I I understand that. I'm just saying that somebody has. So I believe project management ha I think DOT is actually doing it for the county. So somebody needs to look at it before this gets to the bullet.
Sure.
Any other comment?
Um just want to double check, these are single family detached mobile homes.
Well that's why I asked you to put clarification because The the zoning is to R M H, which allows for mobile homes. But Shelley said that she's willing to commit that it's going to be single family detached, not mobile home.
Not mobile home.
Which if that's the commitment then she needs to amend the deed restriction 'cause that's not what it says.
And can you do single family detached non-mobile homes in the RM1 M H?
I believe so, but I'll let staff answer that question.
RMH you can do single family detached homes and that change was made by the Board of County Commissioners in an amendment amendment in either 2018 or 2019.
Here's the vision road in the red, so and we'll get that information. We'll uh check with Margaret or
Yeah, I'm I'm not really as concerned about Division Road because that appears to be east of their property. I'm more concerned about
The allocation.
The re the realignment of ninety eight in the Clemson.
And our parcels here.
Are parcels next to the first blue area that you see there on the map on uh close to three oh one. It may adjacent to the eastern.
We'll have that information.
Any other comment?
Nope.
So I guess do we make a a motion with the recommendation or the uh change
to the deed restrictions or I think you can make a motion for approval with the understanding that the outlets can amend their deed restriction to clarify that it's single family detached.
I'll move that.
My second.