comprehensive plan amendment for multifamily at 301 and Chansey
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
This archive found it in the recording: a call to order, a recess, or business the board never listed. The county recorded nothing about it, so everything below is our reading.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Sep 9, 2026
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 29m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 96% of 138 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Good motion. Move. Second. All in fair say aye. Aye. Item D46.
P-46 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times June 24th, 2026, and by affidavit of certified mailing to insight listings.
Item P forty six is PD twenty-six zero zero zero seven. This is an ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan, providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map map map two-fifteen and sheet twenty-three from res 9, residential nine dwelling units per gross acre, to res 24, residential 24 dwelling units per gross acre on approximately 15.267 acres of real property Property, a portion of 18.634 acres of parcel 232621020071000020,
located on the southeast corner of the intersection of U.S. Highway 301 called Boulevard and Chansey Road, and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency, providing for repealer severability and an effective date. This comes to you with recommendations.
Mm-hmm.
Presentation.
Presentation.
Uh this project uh is a comprehensive plan map amendment which is changing the future land use from res nine to res twenty four. Uh and the purpose is to allow for a maximum development of three hundred multifamily units on approximately fifteen or so acres uh of a eighteen point six three four acre parcel. And as noted in the ordinance description title description, etc. the southeast corner of the intersection of US Highway 301, which is Gul Boulevard, and Chansey Road. And there is an uh accompanying
rezoning associated with the project, which is PD 26 W832, the Gagney Robert H. Trust Gagney MPUDs. This is the general location in the county. It's uh in the southeast part of the county, just south of Zephyrhills, in the east market area. Uh this is the subject site itself, this is the whole 18.6 acres. Uh you'll notice Gull Boulevard is west of the subject site, uh Chansey Road is uh to the north, and
there is Crystal Springs Road, which is on the east boundary line.
This is the general area that we are looking at as part of this project. Of note in the area is the location of Zephyrhills just to the east along Paul S. Buckman Highway. There are unincorporated densities to the west that are mobile home parks. These mobile home areas are similar in density to the value that's proposed in this particular project. The project is proposing a
Res twenty four future land use, however the ultimate density in the project is currently coming out at nineteen twelve units per gross acre. Within vicinity of this 19 dwelling unit per acre proposal, there are the mobile home parks, which are generally at about 14 dwelling units per gross acre. These have been there since the early 1970s. At the intersection
Ah the let's go back. At the intersection of Chansey and Gul Boulevard, uh there is uh common commercial feature land use associated uh with the site, the subject site, and that does carry a twenty four dwelling unit per gross acre uh density by comparison.
This site is within the airport approached surface area. And you can see the Zephyrhills Airport to the north and east. And any subsequent rezoning action will have to take that into consideration as well as the development of the site, any development of the site. It's also within the airport influence area. This is the two areas in context with the site. This is the current Res9 uh depiction that we have
on the Future Landing Stamp today. Uh with the Res 24 overlaid on it. This is what it will look like. You'll notice the blue just to the at the apex or the corner there, that is the Calm portion, which is at the southern end. terminus of a an entire corridor that runs along Call Boulevard that is R O R, which is the orange on the map. I lost my pointer. Uh these are the policies that are generally associated with this uh proposed map
amendment to the comprehensive plan, future land use map amendment. And this comes to you as noted before uh with a recommendation to adopt the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and uh ordinance by Ron Calho.
Yeah Terry in this same area here there's you're you're sitting right on two like China says two lane road also 301 right there is two lane at two lane canadian is right on down to Hillsborough County on Gulf Boulevard 301 going to the south I just have concerns we keep adding apartments and complexes like this and putting more and more cars on two-lane roads that are they gonna be four lane? Yeah, someday they
will be. But if it's not done before this comes in, you're shoving all that traffic right in on two-lane roads that are already, I mean you go there right now and you back up the traffic. Just uh that's a real issue for me is the fact that we're doing some of this on two-lane roads. We shouldn't be looking at makes because I heard there might might be a possibility that Chancellor gets four-lane, but I don't know when that's gonna happen. So if you said it was gonna be four-lane today,
it would be five at least five years or further down the road before handling that traffic.
Yes, sir. With the uh as part of the comprehensive plan review, there's the transportation needs assessment that is conducted, which is a a general review of the transportation network in the area. And the uh the roadway segments that were analyzed, which included Gul Boulevard, um the transportation review indicated that the study area will operate within the adopted level of service with background traffic. With the addition of the net increase in the project traffic based on a 2050 cost affordable plan.
So
according to the land development code, following most criteria, it's indicating that it's going to be operational even with background traffic added. But i your point is noted and I think there's a discussion regarding that as part of the MPUDs.
And I'm sure we got right-of-way for the roads being widened in the future on both sides of this property.
Yes, sir.
Thank you very much. Understand the continuity approach here, right? With the mix of densities at this intersection.
Well we look at the uh trying to figure out the road network to the west of this site of Crawl Street on Gaul The mobile home park, that has a res 99
Resign.
Res ninety ninety nine use A. I think it's res ninety nine
in terms
of
range. Yeah, if you're getting that data point from it from Pasco Map. Yeah, so that that means that ninety-nine percent of the site is uh res nine future land use categorization.
That that's how that reads?
Yes, sir. So
say if that were to ever 'Cause you look at, you know, if that were to ever be to redeveloped or that w that site were to be sold and become something else. Um but you could. I mean it's a cor this is a corridor that's growing and there's a lot of investment coming in. Um
to to plan for the you know.
plan for the future here on on the appropriate on the appropriate uses and how to structure this corridor. So Um
I guess back to the road road network point.
Um if this were to be flipped and multifamily were to be put here, that would put us essentially how many units based on the acreage? Based at res nine.
Yeah, at a res nine it would be about three hundred or so units.
Okay.
Yeah. At Res 9.
And I think today um
If my eyes if my eyes serve me correctly, um there are pr there are over three hundred mobile homes on site. Yeah, that's
a there's a b it's a it's large. Okay.
I'm done, Chairman
Mariano. So I'll say that um I think you know Commissioner Oakley after you talked about this road even like a few months back, trying to make that left turn down 56 from John C from the other side. It was like at least three lights from a mega pair of. Yeah. And I've been I've done subsequently to that too, coming back to Paduco the other way and still a couple lights in the middle of the day. So it's a lot of traffic that's in that area. The top note of it's commercial. That about three acres up there.
Uh yes, about approximately three acres.
You've got apartments, other high intensity coming down behind that's going to drive the corridor even further, which I don't think staff even considers that when we're going through these things because the calculations are done. But I mean it is such a jam-packed area now to throw more density in there, even though there's other density there. I I like expanding the commercial on that. Yeah. The
problem also is that when you go south on 301 there you run into an area where there's a new light there right now, right in front of the trailer park on the north side of the road. There was a lot of accidents happening until I got that light put in there by F D O T and they they did a great job getting that in there as quickly as possible. But the four lane to me should have already been done through there and on pass 56. So I just think it would have been better if we were looking at
this and it had four lanes instead of two in front of it.
And I say I'm I'm uncomfortable as well with the height of the airport there as well. I mean it's right in the line, so uh Yeah, going from resinite to this allows that extra right, which otherwise wouldn't crawl. Yeah.
Uh the question down?
Um Well I was okay with I was okay with this transition. Um but what are the rules for the hike? What you mentioned something but that it would have to be looked at. What what's that mean?
Uh what it means is so the height is going to be regulated by the MPUDs, which we can bring Wil up to speak to the height really quick. Um but ultimately any development that takes place on on this site, whether it's this type of development multifamily or something else, it will have to meet the uh land development code requirements where the airport is running. So it'll control the height. At this distance from the runways, um, you know, a four-story or three-story structure is not going to be uh in the way of an airplane trying to land.
So so it's not an issue. I mean maybe four story benefits.
It's within the influence area. So there are certain things that have to happen, or rather I should say cannot happen. So they'll have to meet that. But from a height a purely height standpoint, it's not as if the buildings are standing in the way of or yeah, standing in the way of the runway itself. But uh if Will wan you want to mention the the MPUDs
William From Million Planning Development Economic Growth. Within this portion of the airport influence area, the maximum building height is sixty feet. The maximum building height for this project is fifty-five feet. And five feet below. How many stories is that? Uh fifty-five feet would be a maximum when you look at like the pitch of the roof, a maximum of four stories uh would be for the fifty-five feet.
Well, we we don't have any five story. Multi family do we? Yeah.
Okay, do you have it?
Thank you, Shelley Johnson, 6400 Madison Street. Um I do have my team here today, Mike Razor, who um can answer any road questions, who is our traffic engineer, um, as well as Seth Bennett from Mike Galvin's office, um, who is one of the developers on this site, um, as well as um Lance Bunnett, who's our architect, who can answer any other additional questions. He's uh I think online uh virtually, I hope. Um just to give A little bit of background on this parcel because I do think the planning history on it is relevant to today's hearing. This
parcel was part of what was known back in the early 2000s. Mr. Dagnes owned these part these parcels in this area for a while as the RUX MPD West. We had the RUX MPU West that we did, and then we had the RUX MPD East that we did in the city of Zephyrhills at the same time. So the parcel's been around for a very long time from a planning perspective. Rux MPU West ultimately became what you all know today now is Cobblestone. And of course, you know, Cobblestone has
a townhome and single family in it. That is the property. If you're looking at the property, it's the obviously the developed property right directly to the south of this property. You also have right adjacent to cobblestone. On the other side of Deer Springs, or on Crystal Springs Road, Deer Park, which was, I think it's got um, I want to say like a 116 uh 50-foot lots in it. Um, so that's a single family development as well. Of course, as staff's pointed out in their um in the in the discussions, everything to the north of this property
is heavy mobile home density, a little bit older housing stock. Um, and I know that. the that the those units from the calculations that have been done have actually developed out at about 14 units to the to the acre. So they're above that RES nine simply because they developed before that those designations actually went into place. Oh okay. Yeah if you could go to the next slide that might be helpful too.
Um there's a lot of improvements that are being brought with this development that otherwise you know will not happen ultimately because this residential piece to develop is going to have to do the significant improvement to Crystal Springs Boulevard from its southern boundary to the terminus of Chansey. And that'll it'll it will be brought up to standard in accordance with what MI is doing to the south. There'll be a multi-use pro uh path on that road, uh ten foot multi-use path, a five foot sidewalk. The
developers also agreeing to put in a 10-foot sidewalk on the south side of Chancellor along its northern boundary to connect to the the the you know upgrades and stuff and uh the improvements that are gonna be going on on 301. Um I did hear the question about my understanding on the F DOT improvement in the four-lane is that um ultimately again this property wouldn't need that in order to develop. We'll have to do the improvement to Crystal Springs Road. Um and I do have again our traffic engineer who can address those questions m you know better than I can. But
ultimately, um When the my understanding is that the funding is not in place for the poor laney, however, they are at the top of the list in terms of getting ready to go. So it is high in the list of occurrence. I don't think it'll be years and years and years, hopefully. But that actually will also include that particular improvement that they're going to be doing, will also include a 10-foot multi-use path on the west side and another five-foot sidewalk on the east side. So the pedestrian improvements and stuff will go all around the property. We're gonna
have a shared access road with cobblestone and MI to the to the south. So there's a lot of really great improvements that are coming along with it. The reason I mention all of that is because ultimately, you know, there's only so much that can be done with this property, because it is a transitioning property in between the non-residential and the residential in this area, especially on the property itself. So, you know, the multifamily use seem to be it is, you know, the best uh use for the property. There's a lot of really site-sensitive design criteria that we've added to the MPUDs. I know we haven't gotten
to that yet, but um in terms of building orientation, buffering, all kinds of things like that. So, you know, I think it would be it's a good use for the property. It makes sense from a planning cent uh perspective. And then it also allows for all these improvements to go. Which you know otherwise can't occur. We have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them.
No Chair
It's not an exciting project, but I... I don't disagree that it's it's it's not an inappropriate use based on Paduco and the coffee flavor factory to the to the east, the densities to the west, and everything that's going on in into this this this corridor. You know, I it's not it's it's not an inappropriate
use and it's it's it's appropriate, but it's nothing like super exciting to just give you that. Well,
let me ask you a question. You know, used to talk about the word eateries and putting something more in depth complex. Now this is supposed to have, you know, uh fifth of the site is supposed to be commercial anyway, and it's a zone FYI now. Uh if we're just gonna get straight apartments with all that density around it, I gotta think that the commercial will still buy a power, at least to some degree. Yeah, the bottom floors are whatever. Yeah. We don't see any of that. There's nothing to draw people in and you know, let's face it, you know, today I was gonna get a car drive 'cause
I had a little sore throat this morning. And there was nothing in here. I might be able to help yeah. I'm all good now. But there was nothing around here really to just go get So look around that whole area, you don't see a lot of commercial there either. And it's actually big commercial, but we should have some commercial use in there, especially the bottom close, like we've talked about many times, these little projects we see. Well there's nothing here but apartments. I don't have to see why would we do that on this section? The road is so busy anyway. And if you actually need to be able to save some trips instead of creating
more trips, I think it'd be a better use of the property.
Mr. Douglas. Mr. Douglas?
Um no, I just thought I saw that the corner was commercial.
Yeah, so the Corners Commercial, what happened with this site, and I forgot to mention it, and it is relevant. Um, it ultimately, for many, many years, they thought there was going to be an F DOT signal that was gonna go in on 301 to the axis of this particular site. So a lot of the site, for a long time, we had a lot heavier entitlements on it. The last time that I worked on it, um, when it was part of Cobblestone in 2018, it had almost 170,000 square feet of commercial on it. But ultimately what happened is F DOT for whatever reason moved that signal south. So it
is now at the M at the residential entrance for the Cobblestone MPU. When that happened, it completely changed the dynamics of this site for Mr. Galvin and Mr. Gagney in regards to what it could be used for. Obviously, it can no longer be used for you know a heavy shopping plaza like a public shopping plaza or something of that nature. Just you know, it's not gonna work with the access without a signal. So um I did for I forget to mention that and that I do think that is relevant, you know, with regards to the planning history on it.
I I do have a question. Mr. Um looking at the map, where it says Gaul Boulevard, um there's like this strip. behind your parcel and north of the pond. What what is that? What's going on with that sort of blend?
So um there originally this again was part of Rux and part um cobblestone. So that is gonna be a a shared access road with cobblestone. Um I think it's called Stony Wood is what I think it was identified as. Um and MI and the C D D of Cobblestone ultimately put that road in. So there'll be landscape buffering and and things of that nature down there as well. So that'll be another nice improvement that'll come in with this.
Oh, okay. Yeah. anywhere else. Yeah. So that isn't a cul de sac, that's a stub out right
there. Yeah, it'll be a shared access road. Yeah. Okay.
It looks wider than it needs needs to be. Are there homes along that road too?
Um I think the layout of it was no, yeah the no there I don't think there was on our side, no. Th there may have been let me look at the site. Says
M M M M M I.
Okay, but it's
Yeah, I mean the build there'll be buildings oriented on our side towards that road and then obviously, you know, where wherever they stub out or you know and their residential lots, which looks like right where they're at right now.
So you'll have access to your property from this road?
Yes.
Good. Lakeshore.
Any questions? Okay. Alright. I have a public comment. Anyone here from the public to speak to the side?
I got one pressure. Please come forward. Is there anyone online?
No sir.
Cindy Bacle. [address removed]. I live the mobile home park that they're referring to is Forest Lake Estates. So I live off of Gateway and County Road 54. Adding any more traffic to Chansey Road or 301. And like
you said, there's been times that Cancy Road and 301 is blocked because that light was put there. It needed to be put there for the mobile home park on 301.
But 301 it literally is backed up past the Hillsborough County line. And it's dangerous in the aspect that you have people that pass when they shouldn't. Um I know I a lot of times when I'm coming in from an appointment, I cut through Meadow Point to get to fifty four. Otherwise I sit through six or seven lights at that intersection. So commercial is
fine. I mean everything out there is pretty much commercial and we're okay with that. We're okay with the steel and we've got sentry boats and all of that out there and and the bakery. But adding apartments is going to put so many more vehicles on the road. I don't know how how those roads are going to handle that. And I know there's plans to widen them. I I understand that. And that's great, but it's not going to happen before
these apartments are done and those cars are on the road. So I'm I'm asking. Mm. if there's any way that this could be looked at a little harder as far as with the airport. Um those planes do fly low sometimes, but since the bakery's been put in there, they're flying a little higher. But the traffic is a concern. Um right now we have a very hard time just pulling out of gateway on the County Road 54
because it's being used as a thoroughfare from ninety-eight to three hundred one for people coming from Lakeland to work here and vice versa. So that's the only worry I have about it. It's just added traffic. Bank.
Anyone share from the audience would like to speak to the Saddlebrook? Never mind. Yes. Well too bored.
Second.
Said it's roll call vote, I didn't vote I didn't make a motion.
Oh I thought you said. Move approval.
I
asked if this was a roll call.
Okay, yes it is a roll call.
Move approval.
Well, you want businesses to move out there but the people can't live any
No, I mean like I said, it's not an inappropriate use. It's not an inappropriate use.
It's just con congested. It's just congested. Public comment essentially said it's not an inappropriate use. It's just gonna compound existing, you know, flow challenges until DOT gets to work on this segment. And there is a piece of commercial to it. I mean it it bits. Commercial has more traffic. It bids the time. It fits the tr it fits the you know, the transition model and Look what's coming on to the east. Uh
It's not inappropriate, I'll second. Further discussion. Yeah. Uh
Then we have a or staff would say I thought commercial generated more traffic than than residential.
Good afternoon, William from Million, Planning Development and Economic Growth. Commissioner Starkey would be correct in terms of the trip generation per thousand square feet compared to multifamily in this case.
Um actually have a question. I thought that um D O T I thought they had money for three oh one. Is that just part of three oh one? It's getting light.
William Vermillion back again. So uh there there has there's an MPUD presentation that hadn't been heard yet that's a companion to the CPA, in which I was gonna talk about F D O T's design of three oh one. It is the top priority of the long range uh transportation plan cost feasible with DOT and Pasco County trying to work on the widening of the four lane in terms of its top priority for funding. The design's already done. This would be getting a hundred
So it improves the traffic in the area.
Well, so I wouldn't say that it would be a capacity improvement for Crystal Springs because the lanes aren't actually expanding. It's uh It's an improvement to the roadway's condition right now. Currently it's substandard. Um it would add pedestrian facilities as well as uh you know actual mill and surf mill and surfaced roadway, not necessarily capacity it currently does serve as a parallel reliever, it would just be able to better function and it's improved capacity.
Dan to your question from DOT is kind of designed but not construction.
Okay, well Commissioner, I just wanted to add something to the start. When we form the uh regional MPUDs, 301 there we're talking right now that needs to be four length back all the way to Hillsborough County. Yeah. It's something we worked together on. I heard that Hillsborough County was on board the same as we are now about getting that board line. So hopefully it happened sooner than not. It's really a backlog of traffic there. And there was some
terrible accidents right in front of that mobile on bark right there on 301 from there and from Chachu V6 from the Center. There's a mobile on there and people getting killed coming out on the road. It was anguish.
Is that where they move the light to?
Yeah, it's where I moved the light or you know. F yeah.
I just remember um DOT coming to the MPU meeting and saying they found some money for rural highways. Cause I I was kind of shocked that it that it jumped
about fifty two. That was a northern that was a northern portion of three or one.
Oh the northern portion.
Right now I'm And it's just a thing that's gonna get sh to me, I'm not gonna go with it, but if you want to hear from the uh MPUDs we can bring that forward. Before you vote on this key.
Just hear 'em together.
At this point, this there's a conversation going on the chair asked about the MPP uh
Okay, yeah, bring it up.
Alright.
Okay, so we have a motion and a second, so I have to do something uh who's our parliamentary? Is that you?
With a motion making.
I will table
this
for now.
is the companion. What's the companion? What
number is it?
I'm looking right now it would be fifty five fifty-five.