P eighty-three Central Pasco Employment Village comprehensive plan text amendment

46:49Aye. Motion passes five zero. Okay. Um P eighty three.

46:56Item P83 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on February 17, 2021.

47:04Yeah, but Hello.

47:16Thank you Mr. Chairman. Um before I get started I do have an updated Sub-area policy laboratories that was um as of last Friday. There's one more revision that I'll read into the record it once I walk through my presentation here. Um I just hadn't called it.

47:37We need to do the wrong one.

47:45Thank you Mr. Chairman Mariano item PDD twenty one zero two nine zero is a comprehensive plan text amendment in the name of CPAL twenty fourteen, Central Pasco Employment Village. Next slide. The proposal the proposal is to amend sub-area policy flu seven dot one dot twelve uh as a text amendment. And the location of this is on the south side of Stable 52 between Calgary Parkway Extension and Bellamy Brothers Boulevard. Next slide.

48:13We in researching and in reviewing the proposed amendments to the sub-area policy, we've looked at these policies that are in the comprehensive plan uh itself, seven one twelve, as well as the central market area, which is policy flu eight one three. We also looked at the EC Employment Center Future Land Use and the CON Conservation Future Land Use. Next slide. This is the location of the Central Pasco Employment Village. It's right in the middle of Pasco County in the central market

48:43area. Next slide. This is the conceptual master plan for the Central Pasco Employment Village. Really quick to walk through the colors for everyone. The target businesses, corporate business park and Light Industrial are the purple colors. The red colors are the commercial. The yellow colors, the corporate business park specifically. And then the brown, orange, and peach colors there that you see are the residential designations, high residential,

49:14medium residential, and low residential respectively. There's also uh a collector road network that is established within Central Task Employment Village. Next slide.

49:26This uh map is illustrating that the entire uh employment village is within the EC, Employment Center Future Land Use. Next slide.

49:35Mm-hmm.

49:36And this slide is illustrating that much of CPEV is AC zoning currently. Next slide, please. So to sum up what has actually changed within the sub-area policy, there are six changes that have taken six major changes that have taken place, five of which I've outlined on the slide, and I'll I'll get to the sixth one. But we've established EC an EC Sites Initiative, an Employment Center Sites Initiative. It was previously discussed at the LPA

50:06as well as in the agenda memo as a service ready sites, but not in the longer in the sub-area policy. The sub-area policy is discussed as the EC sites. And these are intended to ensure the availability of sites for employment uses with supporting infrastructure that's designed, permitted, and constructed in place to accommodate employment uses. The next big change in the sub-area policy amendments is to authorize the increase in the single-family residential cap to 50%, taking it up from 20%.

50:37So 2,250 units of the total, 4,500 can be single-family residential per this proposal. The third major change is to remove the Department of Community Affairs mandate. and affordable housing, which would be consistent with the elimination of similar provisions in other projects. The fourth major change is to enable a case by case MPUD level review to determine appropriate timing and placement of school board facilities. The fifth major change

51:07is to enable an exchange of entitlements between CPEV landowners and tracts by mutual consent and allow the master plan to administratively be revised accordingly. This one needs a little bit of explanation as it wasn't quite talked about at the LPA. Originally, the CPEV was designed to have one main MPUD for the entire area. About two years ago in 2019, Was changed to enable multiple MPUDs to happen within Central Pasco Employment Village. When it was one MPUD,

51:37a single land use equivalency matrix could provide for the exchanges that might take place within the planning area. But when it all went on to multiple MPUDs, each MPUD would have its own land-use equivalency matrix that was not necessarily communicating with the other land use equivalency matrix. Matrices that were that could be established in other MPUDs. This provision basically restores and goes back to the original concept that enables landowners and tracks to be able to make exchanges in their entitlements

52:08and in their designations. The sixth point that's not on my slide is the addition and requirement for mandatory notice to CPEV landowners and a mandatory neighborhood meeting to each individual MPUD application process and to review the proposed CPV entitlement allocations for each MPUD or EC MPUD. And this is essentially to ensure a fair and proportionate allocations take place amidst discussion with all property owners within CPEB. I

52:39mentioned that there was a recent revision to the sub-area policy that's not in the copies that I just provided, as it as it came very recently. So it it's it would be in policy uh provision A10, A.10. And I'll read it into the record uh for the sake of the of the public hearing here today. At the time of MPUD and/or EC MPUD rezoning, CPEB landowners are authorized to exchange land use designations between CPEB landowners

53:09if requested by such CPEB landowners. The total overall entitlements and the allocation thereof for non-residential and residential entitlements approved for CPEB shall not be exceeded in the aggregate. The CPEB master concept plan shall be administratively revised with each. Approval of a MPUD or EC MPD without further plan amendment being required for such concept plan revisions. In order to ensure that individual MPUD or ECMPD applications in CPEB

53:39do not utilize the disproportionate amount of the aggregate non-residential or residential entitlements, each MPUD or ECMP applicant in CPEB shall be required to conduct a neighborhood. Meeting and provide written notice of such meeting to the school board and to every owner of vacant land in CPEB that is greater than 10 acres in size, regardless of distance. Such written notice shall include a the residential and non-residential entitlements being requested in the specific MPUD or EC MPUD

54:10application, B the percentage of the aggregate residential and non-residential. residential entitlements being utilized by the specific MPUD or ECMPD application and see the remaining available residential and non-residential entitlements in CPEB if the MPUD or ECMPUD is approved.

54:32I so having read that uh depending on the board's pleasure I can add that into the sub area policy and then that would be included in the transmittal to DEO. Next slide. The Planning and Development Department is recommending that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the transmittal to DEO and other reviewing agencies of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Central Pasco Employment Village providing for a text amendment to sub-area policy through seven one twelve. And that completes my presentation.

55:08Okay, thank you. Uh Africa.

55:13Commissioner

55:14Starkey. Um Ms. Jim, before before the applicant comes up, can I just ask a couple of questions?

55:18Okay. Come back, Terry. Excuse me. Who wants to have a discussion before the apple comes?

55:27So Terry, from what you just read

55:31If the landowners agree to change um the uses, it's gonna affect that map a bit. Yes.

55:39Are

55:39you comfortable with allowing that to happen in case those purple areas gonna be closer to the red or residential areas coming in too close to the industrial? Are you worried about how that may play out? Well the map would have to

55:51the provision states that the map can be administratively uh reviewed and approved, so we would be able to see how those exchanges are taking place.

56:00Yes. Okay. And then we would recreate the map and everybody would be on this.

56:05So staff still in control where it goes from there. And if the people don't like it, they can come back to the board anyway.

56:10Yes.

56:10Okay. Uh on the allocation. as far as now moving the residential single family up to fifty percent. Um, I'm okay if that number goes up to as far as seventy five percent. I mean I don't I don't I'm I'm not limited to holding that number there. And that would give them more flexibility in case they wanted to go that way. I don't know how the rest of the board may feel.

56:32I'd be careful about putting too much residential because then you end up with smaller lots. Right. We we want to keep these communities growing and and looking good and and we want builders and developers to come and have landscaping and architectural views and and be a community builder, not just a house builder. So I think that's uh very important to keep that in mind as we go forward. 'Cause I I think we're going to actually Not because anything was necessarily

57:03done, but there's some consequences to what we've been doing. Uh and I'll give you a couple of answers that I I got the last couple of weeks. One person was having a hard time because he couldn't get a riding mower from the front yard to the backyard. And that's a very small lot and very it keeps him from doing taking care of his home. and the other one was the fact about a a guy who wanted to paint his house, but the only way to paint his house was a ladder. He puts the foot of the ladder on his neighbor's po property to be able to paint

57:33his house. And the neighbor says no, you can't put it on my

57:36property.

57:37So I we didn't mean for that to be happening, but we want to make sure that we have good community neighborhoods for the Pasco County. And that's the way it needs to look in the future and not continue just building houses.

57:50So Can I also make a comment that you may want to hear from Mr. Cronin before you make that change because I know he has thoughts about Locating industrial uses next to single family. And may have some concerns for that before you make that change. Okay. Yeah.

58:07Well I have some questions if we're doing them now. And then Mr. Two can answer them too. Um first of all, I know it's too late for this, but I gotta tell you this commissioner has a problem that we're I know that we're saying nope, you don't have to do affordable housing. It used to be when you had a DRI I think ten percent of the housing um in a large community had to be affordable. And now we don't require it anymore. Do we collect any money to go into affordable housing pot? Somewhere? I mean Uh

58:38that's gonna be a problem that we don't have that kind of housing around the county. Um you see that in Monroe County where the property values got so high, all the teachers have to live in Dade County and they get bust in. I mean we need to have workforce housing. And um and that's not the same as an apartment, because many of those apartments, they can't afford to live in those apartments. Um my next question is uh dividing up the entitlements. Are

59:09the entitlements um divided up per acre? Say if you have a hundred acres you get or say ten percent of the project Do you get 10% of the industrial, 10% of the housing? How how do you how how how do the entitlements get divided and shifted?

59:28Well I think w if I if I may go back really quick for the on the affordable housing point. Um the current Sibberia policy doesn't mandate. I know I've read I've read it. Yeah. Just because It's it says to provide a strategy for it. So it doesn't preclude us from continuing to do affordable housing. It's just that provision itself has been uh removed from this project in the same way that it's been removed in other projects.

59:52That that was kind of a statement of a warning uh, you know, we're gonna run into trouble if we keep saying we don't require it.

1:00:00Right.

1:00:00We need to have some kind of affordable housing

1:00:03strategy. Can I just add to what Terry said? The issue isn't staff agrees with you, but we have not been uniform in our application of affordable housing requirements. We removed it, we removed it from some re most of the ones that have come in, we've removed that requirement since the DRIs went away. Right. So the strategy when we adopted the Wiregrass PRI was we were supposed to do a a county wide affordable housing ordinance. But we never did it.

1:00:28Well we need to do it. That's kind of what

1:00:30I'm

1:00:30saying.

1:00:32I think even developers agree with you that that's what needs to be done as opposed to applying it on a piecemeal case by case basis.

1:00:39And I would say when you add when you allow for ADUs, additional dwelling units, you also take care of part of that problem and you should be we're working on that. Um okay, so what about entitlement distribution?

1:00:51The entitlement distribution is sort of handled by that A10 provision that I just read. The intent being that the that there is a continuous discussion among the property owners in term in terms of how those entitlements get laid out throughout CPEB. One of the original challenges with CPEB is that the land use designations that you saw in the master concept plan don't necessarily line up with ownership or you know property lines, etc., within CPEV. So the distribution. of those designations has

1:01:22been a challenge for the area. However, through continual conversation and through the MPUD process itself, you can begin to establish a fair allocation appropriation because everybody will know who's getting what, when, and how. And they can also make those those uh exchanges and the entitlements.

1:01:42So before So if a landowner A and landowner B each have their allotment of entitlements and they want to swap them, they can mutually swap them.

1:01:55They they can come to an agreement and then work with the colony, amend the concept plan, as Commissioner Oakley pointed out. And yes, they they'll be able to adjust in order to make it fit.

1:02:07But they can't take away landowner sees entitlements.

1:02:11Right.

1:02:12It isn't the first one in gets to pick the entitlements they want.

1:02:16No, you you still have to abide by the master concept plan itself. You can make adjustments to the concept plan. But y you can't just it's not a free for all to say I'm gonna take all of these because I

1:02:26and I I just wanna make sure everyone understands that 'cause I think there are some that don't understand that and I thought that's the way it was working.

1:02:33Um so Commissioner Starkey I just want to make sure you got a clear answer there. There is no initial allocation of entitlements occurring here. There's an aggregate number of entitlements for C P E V, mm-hmm, but there's no we're not staff is not allocating entitlements to particular property owners at this time. That is done through the subsequently through the MP D process. It is somewhat first come first served, however There's a as Terry read into the record a requirement that every time one of those comes in they

1:03:03have to notice every single vacant landowner in C P V to make sure there's they're not taking too many entitlements. So those other landers could owners can object if s if anybody comes in and tries to take too many of the aggregate entitlements.

1:03:16Because some people um may not want to develop their property. They may want to enjoy it. And I don't think we want to have to push someone to develop um b before. Well

1:03:27it does it doesn't require it doesn't push them to develop. It just i they would have to object though if they think somebody's taking too many entitlements.

1:03:34Okay. And then um one other question I had was about the roads. Uh so how will how will building the roads be um spread out? I mean if so if you're the last one to develop, is it possible you could get stuck with a large road bill?

1:03:53Do you want me to try to answer that for you, Terry?

1:03:55Sure. Sure.

1:03:56Um typically that's negotiated through the M P D process, but as a general rule, each MPUD is gonna have to build the part of the infrastructure needed for that MPUD. So if it for example, I think there's a major east-west road that goes through the middle of this entire project, as each development comes in, they're gonna have to build their portion of that roadway. um or some of the north south roadways they're gonna have to build their portion. Now, whether that's mobility fee creditable

1:04:27or not is something we negotiate through the MPD process, but that's all handled later through the MPD process. Right.

1:04:33Okay. Those are the questions that I want to be sure

1:04:37people had under understanding of.

1:04:38If we'll go ahead with the applicant and go through in the public hearing, I think a lot of these questions be answered and We'll go forward.

1:04:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, Joel to Twin Associates, I represent the Swoke family. А даннее лажтра.

1:04:58really almost dead center of C P E V. I'm going to be very brief. I requested additional time, but I'm going to reserve most of that in case there are questions or any public comment to respond. I do uh wish to introduce um six letters into the record. Uh four are from uh the four largest landowners, uh NCPEV, I have a letter from the CoCalakis family. The Southworth family,

1:05:29the Aprilli family, and the Swoke family. These four families own about 80%, 0% of all the land in CPEV. So although you hardly ever get a hundred percent of people to agree on anything We clearly have the support for this Plan amendment uh from from the vast majority of the landowners. I also have two letters from employment center brokers who've been very active in Pasco

1:06:00County. And who have tried to market property in CPEV, offering their support for this approach for requiring the infrastructure to support the employment sites. I think you saw these letters, they were provided to the Planning Commission, but they basically are encouraging you to approve this plan amendment so that the infrastructure can be brought in. They do believe that this location is marketable. if there's infrastructure available for these pad ready sites. Um and I'll

1:06:29receive a file then.

1:06:31Thank you.

1:06:31Second.

1:06:32Motion or second. By roll call vote.

1:06:35District two, Commissioner Moore. District three, Commissioner Starkey. Aye. District four, Commissioner Fitzpatrick.

1:06:44I think she's off. Aye. Oh there she is.

1:06:46District 5, Commissioner Mariano.

1:06:48Aye.

1:06:49District One Ch Chairman Oakley.

1:06:51Aye. Motion pass 5-0.

1:06:54Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, just to

1:06:58stated that.

1:06:58I have been sworn. And just just to briefly summarize, I I want to thank uh several people. Uh I believe that in my forty-two years, I hate to say, of doing this for a living, and that's as of this week. Um I don't think I've ever had to work any harder uh on a plan amendment. Uh we might have worked harder on a DRI or a large MPUD zoning, but but not on a plan amendment that I've been involved in. But I want to thank the Planning and Development

1:07:29Department, particularly Terry Pitos. Administrator Biles. Mr. Cronin for E D C. Um and all the landowners uh that have been involved in supporting the plan amendment uh And also Lenar Holmes, who's been instrumental because they are the proposed developer for three or four of these major landowners who would be the ones constructing this infrastructure to serve the employment sites if

1:07:59we're able to get the business deal together. That proposed business deal is contingent on this plan amendment amendment approval. If we can get this approved and transmitted, then we can roll up our sleeves and get busy documenting the final terms for those business arrangements. The applicant and the four landowners whose letters I submitted. uh who again as i said control eighty percent of this land They support and agree with 100%

1:08:30of the terms of the text amendments as the PDD staff has now read into the record. So we have no qualm with any of those. We agree 100% with them. We have addressed, we believe, in a reasonable fashion, the concerns expressed by Mr. Croman for EDC. We think we've been responsive to those. We also do have an executed memorandum of understanding between Southworth, Cochalacus, and Swope. to actually proceed

1:09:01in good faith with MPUD approvals that would implement the exchange of land use designations to facilitate an even larger employment center location. uh toward the eastern end of the property where utilities are more readily available. and therefore a better chance of landing users sooner rather than later. So uh God willing and if we get this transmitted I think we can move forward now with a path toward a solution. Again, I know there are always some people

1:09:31that aren't happy. Everyone has their own agenda, they have their own concerns, they have their own goals. and objectives, but I think on balance, if the goal of the county is to get this large employment center in a very strategic location off the ground. We firmly believe that that goal is supported by this plan amendment. And then my final comment is I know there was remaining angst, which has been discussed today, about how are we going to divvy up the entitlements. And as I pointed out when

1:10:01that question was raised recently, this is not the first time that we've had to deal with that. If you think about it, in VOPH, we have dealt with that for 12 years now because this is exactly the same concept. Each VOPH village has an aggregate number of entitlements for the village as a whole. When we file each individual MPUD, we have to have that neighborhood meeting. We show how many of the entitlements we propose to use. We explain how much developable

1:10:31land we have on that parcel compared to the whole village. And we demonstrate to those landowners that it is a reasonable request that that applicant is not taking more than their proportionate share. a proportionate share depends on a number of factors. What where is your location in that master plan? Some of these master plan areas are some of these property owners have almost a hundred percent employment center. Some of them have, you know, very little employment

1:11:01center and more residential because we have wellhead protection, we have a wildlife quarter. So this this this plan was thought out originally. So you can't just say, well, each acre gets X entitlements because some locations are limited to low density residential because they're adjacent to the Wildlife Quarter. or they're adjacent to the well field. On the other hand, some people get huge amounts of employment center entitlements and rightfully so. So what we're saying is we'll provide those notices, we'll invite everyone

1:11:31to the party. We'll invite the school board to the party. I'll buy the beer and popcorn. And and and we'll say, This is what we're proposing, here's why it makes sense, what do you think? Now, in my experience of doing over a dozen V O P H MPUDs. We've had one MPUD and V O P H where we actually had to bring that discussion to this podium. for the board to resolve. One is all. In every other circumstance, we ultimately were able to get everyone

1:12:02to agree that what that applicant was requesting was a reasonable proportion based upon where they were. How many wetlands they did or didn't have, and what the master plan provided. So I am confident that if we roll up our sleeves and do the same thing we've done at VOPH, we will get there a C PEV. It may get a lot easier than you would think if these three or four large property owners in fact do a consolidated deal You may you may have one large MPD

1:12:32in here pretty soon. that addresses eighty percent of these issues and would make everyone's life easier. So we urge you to please see fit to transmit this. We're glad we've worked it out. At least we think we've worked it out. I guess I'll find out now. Thank you.

1:12:51Okay, we have someone signed up. Speaking back.

1:12:54We do have a few individuals signed up, no email, um, and we all the only person on WebEx for this item is additional individuals that are um with the applicant. And I have a couple of individuals that signed up that um are also for the applicant. So I assume Mr. Two spoke for the applicant and no one else did. As we go through the others. For public comment if that's okay. Okay. So we have Andy Scaglione. You

1:13:26would like to um approach.

1:13:30And just as a reminder if you could state your name and address and whether you've been sworn. Thank you.

1:13:42Andy Joseoni, [address removed]. Um I have been I raised my hand in last. Thank you. And um good afternoon. I um I am here to support this, but I want to put on the record that I have two big concerns and that I think that'll be uh more or less covered when um when the the um M M E P D. comes forward at that time. Um And

1:14:13I'll go into to those at the end. At this point, what made me feel comfortable is three people. Bill Cronin, he knocked it out of the park with with this user he's got going in. So that means all the triggers that were in place, they're no longer an issue. So great job. Uh Pasco Kelly's lucky to have him. Number two was talking with infrastructure, Michael Bella back there, where

1:14:43he went over with me with these synergies of of of the project across the street. Um the old um now it's called the uh What is a pest? Uh

1:14:57Yeah, I know it is a Pruitt ranch, you know, years ago. And um anyway with that happening, both of them there's a lot of synergies with the sewer and water, and we're gonna get utilities gonna come there with the the two projects. So um thank you, Mike brings a lot from the private sector and and uh has got a great reputation among them in in the industry. Uh third of all um probably in thirty-five years the most knowledgeable town talented county attorney you have here. Um and uh thank you

1:15:28very much. You made me feel very comfortable. Uh you got a great reputation as a straight shooter and um and with the language that was put in with section A ten that that that was just read that they have to have a a neighborhood meeting about the entitlements um

1:15:49Um that that makes me feel a lot better. So there's two concerns I have. Number one is You still have

1:15:56a minute.

1:15:58that we get quality over quantity in this this in the CPE D. Um It deserves Pasco County deserves it and we don't need to give the farm away. This is this is quality property, okay? And um so that we get quality over quantity again. And the other issue is that um the entitlements don't get all globed up where if I w I'm not ready to do something, that when the time it comes that that I have something there for my family.

1:16:28Um and and being the last one of the last people standing that um uh their problems when they're far down the line cashed out become my problems and um that that's a real concern for me. For instance uh the creek. I have a creek in my property. Well am I gonna have to build a bridge over that creek because I'm the last person standing. These are concerns I have um When everybody else is cashed out. Thank you very, very much, okay?

1:16:57Thank you for your comments.

1:16:58Thank you.

1:16:59Yes, sir.

1:17:01The next person who has signed up is Sam Rodriguez.

1:17:07As you approach I would just remind you of your name, address and state whether you've been swarmed for the record.

1:17:16My name is Sam Rodriguez, [address removed].

1:17:25Land O' Lakes.

1:17:26And have you been sworn, sir? Did you swear? You did?

1:17:30I did.

1:17:30Okay, go ahead.

1:17:32You know, my concern is uh I'm west of the Aaron Cutoff and all this development is happening to the east. Uh I own a go-kart racing facility there that provides a lot of entertainment for a lot of people. And uh obviously we comply with all the noise ordinances. Everybody has to run a muffler. And uh my concern is that houses, if they start building too many homes and 50-foot lots and they're really close, there's

1:18:02so many people around there that a little bit of noise, you're gonna get complaints. Uh I think it's gonna impact in time. Uh I'm afraid it's gonna also impact the value of my property. if we have to shut the facility down. And those those are big concerns for me. Um and that's what I wanted to uh r uh radiate to you guys today and hopefully with some consideration like Andy said before me. Quality before quantity. I think that's

1:18:33really important. Obviously the more homes you build it's gonna impact roads, it's gonna impact infrastructure, everything. And uh I think that could be a big concern not only for us but the county. And I thank you for your time.

1:18:46Thank you for comments.

1:18:47Thank you.

1:18:50The next person signed up is Nathan Ronara.

1:19:04Mr. Chair, Commissioners, Nathan Jennera, I reside at uh [address removed]. I have been sworn in. So my concern is with entitlement distribution. As yes, Commissioner Yeah. Commissioner Starkey reiterated already. I ask that the entitlements be proportional to the size of the development that is going on. What I don't want to see, as Mr. Scagloni already previously stated, is the problems backflow into us because we don't decide to develop. That is it.

1:19:34Right. Thank you for your comments.

1:19:38And uh the next person signed up is Joe, um is it Poupelle?

1:19:45Hello Commissioner Oakley. I'm Joe Papello, neighbor of Mr. Scaglione. Uh I think he said it all. Y'all have addressed a lot of our issues. And we know we're on the growth pattern here, so we just want it done right. And I've enjoyed it for thirty years, wanna enjoy it for some more. My kids are are living out there and we're concerned I think with a H it at first it sounded different. Sounds better now, so thank

1:20:16you. Who's Andrew?

1:20:20Sir, did you state your address for the record? Yeah.

1:20:24Um [address removed]. I'm right on the creek.

1:20:27And you and you s were sworn in I

1:20:29State. I did that already.

1:20:31Okay. Thank you, sir.

1:20:32Thank you. All right, thank you.

1:20:33And uh the only other person that I have is Mr. Gad. I don't know if he wanted to say something. Yeah,

1:20:39I

1:20:39think he does. Okay.

1:20:41Yeah. We're gonna run this time though.

1:20:45Ray GAD [address removed]. Not here to object to anything in the proposal, but I just wanted to take this opportunity to share with you, you know, some issues that the school board runs into. And the relationship that the school board has with this county commission is nothing short of miraculous. What we have here is very unique. And back in 2002, when I first took a job at this level with the district, we had

1:21:15no surplus land. And we went about the business of aggressively pursuing surplus land and the county, often with David Goldstein's help. we were able to develop policy that ensured that the school board had land to build schools. But I want to bring up a point that Mr. Two brought up. Um by the way, I've been haggling with him for years. He's never brought popcorn or beer. But um I want to bring up the V OPH because the V O P H is a good example

1:21:46of a good strategy. If you look at the V O P H there are colored marks on the V O P H plan where schools are supposed Yeah. And although BOPH was compared as the same as CPEB, it's not the same for schools. We have very different ideas in BOPH about how we go about getting school sites. And recently we've been able to work with the Evans family. We secured a school site without any problems there. We

1:22:16worked with another group of the Evans family, no problem securing school sites. We worked with the Price family, no problem securing school sites. The first uh landowner that objected to us um having a particular school site hired Mr. Two, who came in and in classic Joel Two fashion, huffed and puffed for a couple hours about why we couldn't have that school site, and we relinquished it. We didn't need it anymore. And uh Mr.

1:22:46Two's not the first land use attorney or developer uh or builder that was upset with the school board's need for a piece of land. But in this particular development, there is no definite way for us to get land other than addressing it at every MPUD that comes to um the County Commission. We just ask that going forward. You maintain the same relationship that you've had with us in the past and that we make sure that the school board secures

1:23:17school sites in this evolving corridor. Thank you very much.

1:23:21No, I have a question. Also I just need for the record, Mr. Gadd, if you could state that you were sworn in.

1:23:26Oh, I was sworn in. Thank you.

1:23:29No.

1:23:29Yeah, so that so how will that work, Ray? Um, come back up. So let's just say hypothetically, Andy's the last one to build. A uh Andy, I have no idea how much land you have there. Two two hundred acres did you say? And um and so so there's no school site and you say, Okay, we have to have a school site, it's gonna be on Andy's property. That you would buy it or does it have to be donated or

1:23:55we're we're happy to do either. First of

1:23:57all,

1:23:57no one no one no one ever no one ever donates land to the school board. That is extremely rare by the same thing. Sometimes they do. They they make land available for us to buy. And so we either do that in cash or we do it in credits.

1:24:10Okay.

1:24:10So the way it would work now is eat as each MPUD came in, we would make a decision about what whether or not we wanted to ask for a school site in that MPUD. Yeah but it's but it could reach it could reach the point right where you know we the first MPUD, the second one, the third one, and then it could fall on Andy. And at the end of the day, we're back here in front of the County Commission pleading for help. so that we can get a school site uh in that particular area.

1:24:39So I mean I could is it possible that someone has 200 acres, you need fifty something acres for a high school?

1:24:47Oh no, actually in this particular um uh village we probably need no more than twenty-five. Oh

1:24:54major

1:24:54uh because we're gonna build like a high school academy is the tenant to plan and Mr. T's aware of that I believe. Um and um and it wouldn't necessarily come from the Swope family. I mean we haven't made that assessment. Um I'm just all I'm doing here today, I'm not complaining about uh what's going on, I'm just making it clear to the County Commission that we still need your help. in the CPEV when we come in here and ask for a school site. And if there's resistance from a developer or builder, uh we

1:25:24need your assistance to make that happen.

1:25:26But so each e each residential site will pay a school impact fee. So that's how part of the cost is spread amongst everybody. I just I just don't I I'm dealing with a a developer who and and was the last man standing in a piece, I won't say where, and everyone else got the entitlements and they're left with a pretty tough bag of rules they have to follow. Um, I still want to see that to happen again. And so I'm just

1:25:57feeling for the last man in I just want them

1:26:01to be protected. And we don't want to see that happen either because we don't want to have to deal with the last man standards. So

1:26:07Commissioner Starkey, the language of CPV, which was carefully crafted by Chris Williams and Joel too. Does say as each individual MPD comes in, they can take into account the needs of the entire CPEV. So it's not, you're not looking at just the needs of that individual MPUD. So if the second one in Looks like they need a school site for the needs of the entire C P V, the school board can request that school site. So it's not they're not looking just at what that individual MPUD needs in terms of school. They're looking

1:26:37at all of CPEV. In addition, Mr. Gabb requested that when they have these neighborhood meetings to discuss entitlements, that the school board have a representative there so that they can warn those those Landowners, hey, if you're going to take X amount of residential entitlements, it's probably going to come with a school site. That's the reason he requested to be at that meeting. So we're trying to avoid what you just

1:27:01were concerned about. Just putting it out there that I don't want the last man's You kind of s you said in a way the last one in is kind of Left. There is that possibility,

1:27:12but we're doing everything we can to avoid that.

1:27:14Okay. Well I want to make sure we're doing all we can to avoid that. Mr.

1:27:17Moore?

1:27:18Hey, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um and I appreciate everybody that came up and spoke today. No, and I did have quite a few concerns prior to you know, today's meeting and the thing and the changes that were made. I did watch the um both Planning Commission meetings, had obviously conversations with with with a number of people. Um So I appreciate everybody collaborating and getting together on this. Um even though it's the last hour you got here, right? Um I I but I do agree a couple things I agree on

1:27:49and I do have concerns over, which we're not gonna figure out today. But um

1:27:55When it comes to the entitlements, it's been mentioned already it was previously mentioned. Um

1:28:02I spoke with a with a gentleman that is close to Aaron Cutoff, you know, pretty far away from obviously this project. Um this is a gentleman that had an idea for some a project some time ago, m you know, maybe a couple years ago, did not move forward with it maybe because of some opposition in in the area with some neighbors. And he has something I would assume is going to come to us at some point here in the very near future. And I just want to, you know, I I think about that person. This is a small landowner. This

1:28:32person doesn't have many acres. But we want to make sure he gets the best use out of it. And he has a great plan, which I think everybody in the community will support. But I I do want to make sure that through this process in reviewing each one in each one of these MPVDs, whether it's next month or it's ten years down the road, everybody's on the same page. Not each one of we're not all gonna be here ten or fifteen or twenty years from now. I mean maybe you maybe you all will I'm not but but um I'm going to but um but

1:29:03the same with staff and David may not be here and Dan might not be here other land use attorneys may not be here that are that are present today. Some of the landowners may have the land may have changed hands. So what happens ten or fifteen, twenty years down the road? Is everybody gonna get it? Is everybody gonna understand what we did here today? Is Terry gonna be here ten or twenty years down the road? We don't know that. Um so I just want to make sure that going forward how we go about this, I mean this is ironclad. Right? That we're not gonna come back six months,

1:29:33two years, or three years from now and try to make changes once again. I'm gonna feel confident that today is the day. What was decided today is what's gonna be m we're gonna be moving forward with. So we are on the same page. And that's a big concern. Listen, we know how it works. What we do today, somebody may come five years five five years from now and want to change the rules again. We don't need that to happen anymore. Stick to the guns. Stick to our guns. Now when it comes to

1:30:03the employment sites, obviously we know it's very important and and wanna and I and I do commend um Bill and his team and and and obviously some of the landowners have already participated as well, right? You already have some projects coming in. I don't think you're gonna make an announcement today, but um we know there are things coming um that will be um I'm I'm sure will be announced in the very near future that we're excited about. And when it comes to the schools, you know, that is very important to us. Um so we know there's a good chance whoever's representing

1:30:33the um landowners on this first impute that comes in in front of us, I have a sneaky suspicion we're gonna pump school sites that day. Because we can't wait, we can't wait till the last person's standing. 'Cause I will tell you what'll happen. that land will be so valuable the school board won't be able to afford it.

1:30:53Right.

1:30:54And that right? I mean that's that's the reality of it. So we need to be very conscious of this moving forward when these M P U D start coming in front of us. We can't wait till the last minute to help the school board and work a deal with the landowners and and uh the repres represent uh the representation to help get that deal done. More homes, more students. And what happens when you have students without schools? You're going through the redistricting

1:31:24process once again, and you'll probably go through it again two years later after that. So we gotta be very conscious of that. But let's think well remember, let's think about each and every one of the people that are in the audience today. Stick to your guns, make sure this is ironclad, make sure everybody knows what's going on with

1:31:40Commissioner Starkey.

1:31:41Um I have I have two more things. Um one, this is a large piece of land and I think it's really commendable how everyone's come together to to do this together. But I think it needs a name. I I I'm hoping it's not gonna call the C the C P E V. Um Um so I hope you can get consensus with all the landowners that it has a name. Um and then it could be, you know, the Scaglione ranch at something something. But um

1:32:13No, I'm just saying that just because you have a whole name doesn't mean you can't go ahead and name your own neighborhood within a master. I'd like you to treat it like a master plan community, like Bextey, like Starkey, like you know, like some of those. Um I wish we had more like that instead of the little piecemeal ones that we're getting. And I think you have an opportunity to brand this and to name this. So I'd just put on your thinking cap on that one. Um and um most

1:32:43importantly, there's a Very important trail. Coming off the back of this property.

1:32:51They said there's

1:32:52no trail. There's no trails at all.

1:32:56And it's called the Orange Belt Trail. We have no idea. And it and looking at I'm here on the property appraiser site and it's touching a lot of people's property and um You know, that's that needs to happen in a very good way. um and make sure that all the neighborhoods have access to this trail that's coming from Trinity to the Woodla Coochie State Trail sooner than you think. So um just ha had to get my trail two pieces in.

1:33:27Commissioner Oakley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um Ray, when you talk about the schools as far as what we're going to do, um You know this is called the Central Pasco Employment Village. I mean that's a pretty strong name I think. Uh and I think when we first designed this I went to the largest uh table I've I've been from Pat Gasway's place uh look at looking this thing over and with all the landowners there. And I think if we can work and and Ray, however you feel, if there's a

1:33:57vocational component, especially something can be taught into there to go, I think you could probably get some acceptance and and some traction and maybe even some federal or state funding to help fund that as a as a one-of-a-kind place. I know Amskills is doing a phenomenal job uh getting f federal monies, state monies. Uh they may be able to help something. I was thinking of flagship right on 52 coming in to say, okay, here it's coming, and then if a big industrial place wanted to take it over, they can take Amskills

1:34:27and go move it back. to some other place. So I I think there's some opportunities there and I I think you know working with our state legislators even federal, let's let's start working on that now because that could be a catalyst for the rest of it to go out and do what we want, create jobs, create a quality life, and and really I think be a big state with this whole uh development. So, you know, Pat, I want to say, you know, from way back when putting this whole thing together and and working with all the landowners that are run you know together trying to find the right things to do. Uh you know, Joel as

1:34:57well, so I I think we got a really good thing going here that we can keep on elevating. Okay.

1:35:03All right, thank you. Is anyone at the key ops?

1:35:06Mr. Sharon.

1:35:09Hold on just a minute. How long just a minute? Anyone at the kiosks?

1:35:14There is nobody at the kiosk.

1:35:16All right. Thank you. All right. Ms. Fitzpatrick.

1:35:21And yes, I'm wondering are there any proposed sites on The P B

1:35:31So not yet. No.

1:35:33Are there any specific proposed school sites? Are there any areas on that land specifically that would be a good area for a school location? Okay.

1:35:43Can't be cut. Maybe you can answer that. Joel too again. The discussion I've had with Ray and Chris Williams was the possibility of doing this technical high school uh

1:36:00somewhere uh possibly north of our primary east-west road. The caveat there is we've got to coordinate that with the school district and Mr. Cronin because most of that area is designated employment center. Not that you couldn't create a symbiotic relationship and make it productive. The other alternative, what the school district historically has done to save money is to try to find lower density residential land, as Commissioner Moore pointed out, that the price

1:36:31is more affordable and go there. We have enough acreage that I think the school district actually will have their choice there. I mean. And there are probably some of these low density residential owners that would be more than happy now that the state statute says that they have to be paid fair market value. uh by the school district. To sell. Um and as Ray pointed out, uh once we got on the fair market value basis in V O P H we've had virtually no problem getting those school sites committed. Uh so

1:37:01the short answer is uh none yet and the reason there's none yet Is again the project directly across State Road 52 on the north, Palmetto Ridge, that you did the transmitter today. Um Mr. Gastaway and I also represent that property owner. We're doing that MPD modification now. We've agreed with the school district. Originally that project only had an elementary school site. we've agreed to add a middle school site. So he now will have a

1:37:31commitment for elementary and middle directly across 52 from CPEV. That's why his comment was what I've discussed with Chris Williams is the possibility of a smaller footprint specialized high school in CPEV, which will give us all three levels right there in one location. So we do think we have it covered and at every single MPUD the school district will have the option to say, okay, we We need the

1:38:01capacity now or okay until the next one. Uh and that was that was the theory is look at them one at a time because you're not going to know what your demand is until each one comes forward and he can look at his capacity figures in that district. But we're confident that we'll be able to solve it uh and keep it flexible.

1:38:21that somewhere in C PEV there's going to need to be another school. I mean every b everyone understands that. Okay. And lastly, just for the record, since Mr. Gad uh was being so kind to me This same guy is the one that got him uh three elementary schools, a middle school and a high school at Wiregrass Ranch. is getting him a elementary, middle school, and high school at Two Rivers, uh that got him most of those V O P H schools uh and, you know, I

1:38:51had to tell him once no and he's still sore about it. But I will I will buy the beer and the popcorn and hopefully he'll eventually get over it. Thank

1:39:01you.

1:39:03Ray would like to rebut that?

1:39:09Um

1:39:09I I don't have any rebuttal to that, but I I did want to comment because Mr. Two makes a good point that um we usually try to identify sites before the uh students are generally there. And when we identify those sites, we we want to cut a deal either for credits or cash at the time that we identify the site. And one of the things that often happens to us with developers is they say, okay, here's your site, but we'll sell it to you when you need it. And so as we're waiting

1:39:40for the students to come in and the homes to be built and then all the t entitlements are issued and the land is developed, then we're paying an incredibly high price for a piece of land. So just a a little point that I wanted to make there.

1:39:55Okay. Anyone else in the audience wish to speak? You just

1:39:59you have to lock in the price. Lock in the price and then take then take it later, right?

1:40:05Bill Cronen Pasco E D C I have not been sworn.

1:40:08Okay. Beginning. Do you swear or from firm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, so help you guys?

1:40:14I do.

1:40:15Thank you.

1:40:15So I I just wanted to share a little a little history on this particular site and where we're at. And uh this particular site is probably one of the most complicated uh agreements. That were out there, and we did make Mr. 2 work very hard, as well as many others that both on staff and outside of that. One of the coolest things about CPEV, though, was that there was a triggering provision that said you can't build houses or at least this many houses until there was so much industrial

1:40:46that was put in place. It was genius because the idea was to make sure. Sure, that residential never outpaced industrial. And I'm happy to say though that we do now have at least one project that has triggered that number at well over 500,000 square feet, and another landowner that thanks to this provision as far as the MOU and trading entitlements will be able to expand that industrial so that the eastern side Of CPEV will

1:41:16be a large industrial site. That is the side closest to I-75, closest to the utilities, will save the county a lot of money, will also uh keep the truck traffic closer to the interstate where they want to be. It also will allow those comp those uh landowners to be able to trade the entitlement so that the residential is in one area, the industrial is in another. This is not a typical MPUD where we just have the live work clay where we wait and

1:41:46the very last piece ends up to be industrial, and the price is usually way too high at that point to get industrial. This is one that the industrial is coming first, and I think everyone was pleasantly surprised that the industrial was coming first to the point that that that that Staging or phasing is a moot point now at that level. So we don't need necessarily to wait for the industry. We've got the industry coming. We are getting down in the weeds in some of the other things. I think there was

1:42:16a fear that with this text amendment that we were going to end up just letting everybody get every entitlement that was out there in the process. And what you heard tonight. Is that that MPUD process, it's gonna be it, it's gonna be uh behoove all of us to be really focused on making sure that we mind the little bit of land that we've got left in Pasco County, and that those MPUD processes, as they come forward to you, it's imperative that at that point we

1:42:46no longer are uh that we're we're being transformed. Transparent about who's getting what at that time. Uh, today's may not be that day, but that's gonna be the point where it's gonna get really busy, and I think we're we're all gonna be very engaged in it. I'm really happy with the level of engagement on this particular piece. I hope that everybody will stick with it in the years coming up because those MPUD hearings and those neighborhood meetings are gonna be really, really important. But again, thanks to

1:43:16um uh to David Goldstein and uh and also to Mr. Two in working together to come uh to a conclusion with the language that's gonna work for everybody and get us down to where we need to be and get the development moving.

1:43:31Thanks. And um Mr. Chairman M just to your point that you said about the forty foot lot. I think I think uh just as a general statement, we don't wanna see that there's only The only residential are forty foot lots, I th Um I know. I we would like to see a mixture. This is large enough that we should have all kinds of sizes of lots. But it does concern me that the last man standings Gonna his hand's gonna be tied

1:44:01a little bit. Um so it seems like everyone needs to come in at for the MPUDs all at the same time. And just hash it out.

1:44:09I think I think staff will have a blast with that if if they all come in parallel at the same time.

1:44:14But we don't want to hold you.

1:44:18Mr. Chairman Mariano.

1:44:19Excuse

1:44:20me. Is that good? Yeah. Bill, I I'd say I want to thank you for your uh getting involved and getting your input in there. Uh since you've come to Pasco County, you have done a phenomenal job every step of the way. I mean from years years ago talking about the uh Overpass Business Park on I-75 where I talk about the spray field, et cetera, and you picked up on that one conversation, took a look at it, and then we have a tremendous facility going on now. Your effect of this facility that's been sitting for so long waiting for something to go and working on something to make it happen has

1:44:50been a uh a great asset to the county. So keep up the good work. Thanks for working with everybody around you. Appreciate it. Thank you.

1:44:56Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Is anyone else here to speak today to this item? Seeing no one and no one's at the kiosks.

1:45:11Can I just clarify does that include the amended language as read in the record by Mr Pitos?

1:45:16Yes.

1:45:17Okay.

1:45:19Okay.

1:45:19And it includes that they're gonna name it something.

1:45:27I

1:45:27don't know just. I got a motion and I got a second. All those in favor, aye with a roll call vote.

1:45:34District two, Commissioner Moore.

1:45:35Aye.

1:45:36District three, Commissioner Starkey.

1:45:37Aye.

1:45:38District four, Commissioner Fitzpatrick. District five, Commissioner Mariano.

1:45:43Aye.

1:45:43District one, Chairman Oakley.

1:45:45Aye. Motion passed 5-0. Okay, next time.

1:45:52Thank you. Thank all of you for the work you've done to get to this point.

1:46:01Hmm.