CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST (REGULAR) – Adventist Health System Sunbelt Healthcare Corporation –Multiple-Family Dwellings in a C-2 General Commercial District – Southcentral Pasco County – on the West Side of Bruce B, Downs Boulevard, Approximately 350 feet South of Eagleston Boulevard – Containing Approximately 16.24 Acres (PC: 12/10/20, 1:30 p.m.; DC Hybrid Virtual Meeting; BCC 1/12/21, 1:30 p.m.; DC Hybrid Virtual Meeting; Continued from PC: 11/5/20; 1:30 p.m.; DC Hybrid Virtual Meeting and BCC:11/17/20; 1:30 p.m.; DC Hybrid Virtual Meeting) File Number PDD21-CU08
What the county recorded
Staff recommendation
Approval with Conditions
DispositionContinued
Approved to continue the item for 60 days.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Jan 12, 2021
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Board of County Commissioners, Jan 12, 2021
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 1h 56m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 92% of 624 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Yes, and I believe staff is available to make that presentation.
Item P eighty three was published in the Tampa Bay Times on october twenty first, twenty twenty.
And I will need to swear in anyone that um wishes to speak outside of
Okay.
Is there anyone um On WebEx? I guess not. So nobody on WebEx.
There is no one on Web um WebEx, but I do have emails to read into the record and there were emails um for received and filed.
Well, hold on. Sorry. So Todd, has the applicants team been promoted at this point?
Yes, sir. They are online now. So I would a ask the clerk to swear in the applicant's team um before we start with this public hearing.
Okay.
Mm-hmm. Those to speak uh to this matter, if you could please raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give? Is the truth so help you, God.
I do. I do. Okay.
Thank you.
Okay. Cherry, who's making your presentation?
Uh Christina Acosta should be on WebEx. Um Make that presentation.
Todd, has Mr. Costa been promoted?
She is, she's online, I don't know why we can't hear her.
It sounds like maybe she's having problems with her microphone because I do hear some sort of sound on the other end.
So I can do it. Okay. So uh uh unless Christina can jump in, I'll go ahead and and uh start the presentation. So P eighty three is P D D twenty one C U zero eight. Uh it's a conditional use request entitled Adventist Health System Sun Belt Healthcare Corporation. Um, the project is located where the star is, on the west side of Bruceby Downs, approximately 350 feet south of Eagleston Boulevard. In the Wesley Chapel
area. The site contains sixteen point two four acres and is uh currently undeveloped. The applicant is proposing to develop the site with a maximum of two hundred and forty eight multifamily dwellings. The surrounding areas characterized by residential and commercial uses. The subject area has a future land use of MU, which is mixed use, uh mixed uses under the comprehensive plan. The it is outside of the policy area. For the newly adopted multifamily policy directive that the Board of
County Commissioners um passed in July of twenty twenty. which outlines a review process for projects along 05456. Uh this is the surrounding zoning uh around the subject property in the pink, which is currently uh Uh C two use. Or C two zoning? Next slide.
And this is showing the the subject property within the future land use context. Uh illustrating the MU emanating from Wesley Chapel Boulevard to the north southward along Crucifi Downs, surrounded by PDs. And uh some conservation flus. Next slide.
and the aerial of uh the surrounding area. Eagle Sten wraps to the uh north and west. of the subject site. The site is primarily along Bruce B. Downs as indicated on the area. Next slide. Access would be off of Bruce B. Downs as a result. This is the conceptual site plan that had been uh provided uh to staff indicating four buildings with access, main access
off of Bruce B. Downs. any large uh wetland to the south of the subject property. Or on the subject property? Next slide.
And the recommendation before the Board of County Commissioners today is uh one of the four identified on the slide and in your agenda memo. Um you may approve the conditional use requests w uh which it would be consistent with the recommendations made by staff um with the conditions therein, approve the conditional use request with modified conditions, uh deny the conditional use request, or direct the planning and development department to another action as may be desired by the Board of County Commissioners.
Um having completed that presentation I'd like to move into um a follow-up presentation to provide some context. to the to the board regarding the multifamily land use uh in as it relates to the county, how it looks in the county, uh, how it looks in the South Market area, and how it looks within the local uh commission district. As soon as they um Load up the uh the PowerPoint.
Mm.
Yeah.
Yes, perfect. So um this is going to be a very quick presentation uh to recap uh some of the high points made during the February 2020 workshop on multifamily that um that we had last year. Generally defined in the land development code, multifamily is a is known as a dwelling, multiple family, a building containing two or more dwelling units. And there are three multifamily Euclidean zones currently identified in the land development
code. MF1, which is 12 dwelling units per acre, MF2, which is 18, and MF3, which is 24 dwelling units per acre. That's the definition in the Land Development Code. The definition in the comprehensive plan notes a building containing two or more dwelling units, including units that are located one over another. Um additionally, within Chapter Two, uh in the future Land Development Code It adds duplexes, multifamily units, condominiums, and townhouses, which in the context of the comprehensive plan Multifamily
therefore encapsul the term multifamily therefore encapsulates everything that is more than a single family detached house. So single family attached, duplex, townhouse, et cetera. Apartment. Next slide.
So in the comprehensive plan, 21 out of the 50 uh sub-area policies that exist make provisions for multifamily. And we'll note that throughout the county, 26% of those are in the Res 6 future land use and 27% are within the Res 9 future land use. And data gathered shows that about 67% of zone parcels in the county are capped by the flu. And this is an important point that I'll illustrate in a subsequent slide. Next slide.
So I'm not gonna go through this, but this is essentially the map indicating all the different areas within the county. that um multifamily can potentially be built in. It includes both the Euclidean zones and MPUD zones. But uh keep in mind that that the the many yellow areas are the single-family residential districts. So it's provided as a contrast to where multifamily is uh Hello. Next slide.
So when we look at the zoning districts by the acres, we realize that agricultural zoning takes up about sixty-four percent of the county. That's the big green uh piece of the pie there. MPU D zoning is about twenty-two percent of the county. Uh residential zoning itself is 11%, commercial is 2%, and industrial is 1%. And if we zoom into that residential slice of the pie, we out of that 11%, 94% of that is single-family
zoning. And uh 6% of that is multifamily zoning. So we see that within the residential context, how much multifamily there is. Next slide.
Um this graph illustrated um how much Of the multifamily is what type of Euclidean zoning district? So 6% of the 11%, right? So Seventy five percent is zoned M F one. Uh twenty-three percent is zoned MF two and two percent is zoned MF3. The bar chart here illustrates The contrast between the percentage of acres zoned for single-family residential,
which are the bars, and the percentage of multifamily zoned acres, which is the red line. And since the project that we're talking about today is in the South Market area, we'll focus on the middle bar there. Um twelve point four four percent is residential districts. and uh single family residential districts and 1.5% of the self-market area is multifamily zoning.
Next slide, please.
So across the market areas, um A good way to understand the amount of multifamily that exists within uh each of the the market is to know how many units there are. Uh based on our estimations back in February. In the south market area there were a potential of eight thousand one hundred and three units. In the west market area, where I think it's to be expected you have the most at about 19,413 units. In the central uh market area is 3,000 or so, and in the east it has
the least with 1,113. So 67% of multifamily zoned acres are capped by the flu, as we noted. Um and the potential for non-single family detached units in total is about 34,277 units. This is countywide uh perspective. So and then based on the NAL codes for multifamily and condos. There are approximately twenty-three thousand ninety-two. units built today, or at least in February. This number may have increased slightly since February.
Um maybe by a couple hundred, uh, given the the rate at which construction uh takes place. Fifty-seven percent of the multifamily units were built under MPUDs. Uh next slide.
Can you stay on this slide for a second?
Yes. How many were condos built? Uh uh can you go back one slide?
How many of those are condos?
Yeah. Which is one on based on N N A L O O three and O four.
Yeah. I don't have the d the breakdown on how many of those are actual condos. Um, but as I noted previously the land development code and the comprehensive plan, they don't make a distinction. between condos or townhouses or condos and apartments. It's all put together in that one term multifamily. Right. But do others separate them out or are we just are we unique? Um I I think the data you you can dig into it and find out. I I don't have that answer on me right now though. I
asked it before, but yeah, I wouldn't mind knowing. Okay.
Okay. Um Perhaps some of the staff that might be listening can research that and send me a WebEx Teams note. Next slide.
Um in terms of the MPUDs, there are two hundred and ten MPUDs in the county, twenty-one Or Specifically focused on multifamily. Those 21 MPUDs yield 8,349 units. Uh there are an additional 70 MPUDs that include the possibility of multifamily units as a part of residential uses across the county, but these units are not the exact number of these units are not known, mainly for reasons of land use equivalency matrices, and I'll get into that in in short.
But based on uh NAL CODE O three, there are seven thousand five hundred and fourteen apartments in MPUDs.
Apartment units?
Apartments.
There are okay, there are that many apartment units.
Apartment units. Not
apartment units.
Not buildings. Not buildings. Units.
Next slide please.
That's just the M PUDs.
that are M PUDs.
Yes, I think so, yeah. Um and this is just a reminder uh from what we had talked about back in February that There are is a number of options in re in the residential sector in terms of uh the types of buildings that can be built to accommodate multifamily. So on the left end of this spectrum uh is your traditional single family detached home. And on the far right end is what the graphic illustrates as a midrise.
You could uh use the word apartments, apartment building there as an example of something that can go up four stories or so. Uh but then there's quite a middle ground that exists between those two extremes. These include duplexes, triplexes, courtyard apartments, bungalow courts, townhouses, multiplexes, live work units. And that's just the terminology used in the graphic here. There's other types of terminologies and building typologies that you could accommodate. uh multifamily
in in different forms and appearances. point of this graphic that that we talked about back in February. Uh next slide please.
So at this point I'm going to talk about multifamily in two parts. Uh this project is in located in the South Market area. So I'm gonna talk about Euclidean zones within the overall South Market area itself. And then the next slide I'm gonna talk about M PUDs specific to the commission district uh two, which this project is in. So out of the entire South Market area, 815 acres are zoned, MF1, MF2, and MF3. Those are the Euclidean zones.
Uh that's that amounts to about 1.5% of the land use in South Market. Out of those, eighty-five percent is MF one zoning, so six hundred and ninety-one acres. Ninety-six acres are MF two and twenty-eight acres are zoned MF three. Um the table to the left at the bottom illustrates what the maximum possible gross density is. Mentioned it earlier, it's for one, two, and three, it's twelve, eighteen and twenty four. Um but the the
real focus of this uh slide here is to look at the chart titled By the Flu, the zoning density is not realized. What do I mean by that? Out of the uh eight hundred and fifteen acres. fully two thirds of those acres are within res six and res nine future land use categories, which means that Even if you just look at MF1 specifically, the 12 dwelling units per
gross acre that the zoning district allows. is never realized when the res six or the res nine is overlaid on top of it. And those densities are then capped at either six dwelling units per gross acre per the future land use or nine dwelling units Um, per Gross Acre. So two-thirds are not uh uh realizing their zoning density potential. Um and then with regard to the to
the last third, let's say in the Res 12, 24, and ROR, it's kind of a mixed bag depending on where you know, if you have an MF3 uh in a res two four, it's gonna realize it's potential potentially.
Can you can you see that in layman's terms? Does that mean there aren't going to be as m nearly as many units built as could be allowed? I don't know. I don't want to say that.
Yeah, basically that's Yeah, it's a good way to summarize it. Um if the future land use says that you can build six dwelling units per gross acre, but your zoning is MF1. It allows you twelve. You're not gonna be able to build the additional six because the future land use is holding you at six. Right, so you won't be able to build as much as you as you noted.
So
So it's a cap. It's a cap on density.
Um so this is where the majority the red box illustrates where the majority of the uh multifamily zoning is falling uh within the South Market area. Now key point is that in earlier slides I mentioned that sixty seven percent Of multifamily zones are falling countywide now, are falling within the Res 6 and RES 9 future land use categories. We see that number come up again here when we're speaking specifically to the South Market area, that about two thirds are
indeed within the Res six and res nine again. So the proportions are coming down. Um from county wide. And being reflected within the self market area specifically. Um Next slide.
So as I mentioned, the second part of this is to focus in on the commission district where this project is located. And consider the MPUDs that are taking place now. There are 68 MPUDs in Commission District 2. Twenty-five MPUDs enable multifamily entitlements. And as I mentioned earlier, these this means that anything greater than single family detached, so the single family attached, the townhouses, the condos, the apartments, etc. those are all gr uh lumped together
in the comprehensive plan and land development code as multifamily. Thirteen of those twenty-five are in enable multifamily land use by the land use equivalency matrix. And the trade offs that illume uh provides. So for the benefit of our listeners at home, a land use what a land use equivalency matrix is, it's um an instrument that uh considers the trip generation, how many uh trips come and go from a land
use, right? It's an estimation based on the uh ITE. the institute um institute of transportation engineers. So it measures trip generation between land uses. And we use the Loom in order to understand what the impacts are going to be the transportation network, such that whatever land use is ultimately approved, it's not going to overwhelm the local transportation network. And so we use the total amount of trips generated by a project. And within a
loom we say, You can trade off your entitlements of you know, retail square footage for residential or vice versa. Um as long as you maintain the same number of trips. that are coming in and out of the development. So that's what the loom trade-offs are all about. So 13 uh MPUDs enable multifamily through Loom. And I mentioned earlier that it that's kind of hard to do kind of hard to estimate because depending on the number of
other non-residential entitlements a developer may potentially want to do within a MPUD, they can translate that into an equivalent amount of trips in residential. So, for example, if you were to change a hundred thousand square feet of retail into residential, That I'm just u using numbers just to illustrate. That may translate to 200 apartments. But if you go 150,000 or maybe 200,000 square feet of retail and you translate that into apartments, maybe it
goes up to 400, right? So you get the idea of the more you trade in one area, the more you can pick up in another. But it's not an equivalency, right? It's not like you're getting 200,000 square feet of residential for 200,000 square feet of retail.
generated in residential than there is in retail.
Well uh what I'm saying yes, right. So but the total amount of trips stays balanced.
Because they they have a they have a trade.
Yes. Yeah. So the the the outcome in terms of chip generation remains balanced where it was approved. Sometimes it comes in less, which is a good thing. It saves our transportation network. Um and I will mention that ten of those thirteen are located in Wesley Chapel. So next slide, please.
So this is a a zoomed in shot of Commission District Two uh in the Wesley Chapel area. So we're focusing around the area of State Road 5456, I-75, Bruce Bowns region.
Mm-hmm.
Um and just to the north is State Road fifty four. And to the south is where the the commune line is with Hillsborough. And I've circled all of the MPUDs that have the multifamily entitlements. So anything that has a circle has multifamily. A red circle is an MPD with a defined multifamily entitlement. Uh a yellow circle indicates an MPD with a multifamily entitlement via the land use equivalency matrix instrument that I that I explained. And as you can see, um
there are uh quite a few. All the gray that you see on the map is MPUD, and there are ten. Uh, such MPUDs that have land use equivalency matrices that enable the potential trade-off to multifamily land use. that doesn't necessarily mean that the land that multifamily land use has actually been built out there. However, as we presented previously in um
February. Um I believe the statistic was that about two thousand, two thousand five hundred apartment units had been built within this geographic region. Um so give you a context for how though all those MPUDs are currently operating.
Mr. Chairman Mariano. Yes, sir. Thanks, Terry. You're doing a great job. Um, I guess one thing I just want to add to this map is what we don't see on here.
Other apartment complexes that aren't part of an M PUD. So that's also important to uh To state is that There are parcels here that have apartment complex already, apartment complexes already or do have entitlements. or are in the process and already have been approved of building um apartments in the future. So If you were to even add those, this area would Light up even more. So
Yeah, and and I think that's part of the story of the uh multifamily Euclidean zones that we were talking about.
So but these aren't necessarily apartments. Uh
are
you showing uh new river on here?
So New River is a T which is gonna have Live Works, town homes.
Potentially. I it could, yeah. It could but again we're we're talking about multifamily, not specifically a apartment or a condo project or a townhome project where we're we're identifying where the multifamily entitlement exists with a land use equivalency matrix. We would have to dig into each of those M P O D S to see is this land use equivalency matrix making a trade? For apartments specifically? Is it making a trade for townhouses? Is it making a trade for whichever
doesn't mean these are all apartment buildings?
Yes, there's about two thousand dollars.
buildings. This is a map of multifamily.
Yes, it's Maple Multifamily.
Which is a duplex, which is a townhome, which is
No.
Right?
Yeah, according to Comprehensive Planets all
lumped together.
Oh, he showed us what multifamily Well, I mean
we don't have any of those duplexes around there like you're talking about.
Well New River does.
Yeah. Well, so Mr. Chairman, just to add this does not include New River because this cuts off a uh Morris Bridge.
I think number one. I'm sorry.
Morris Moor New River is closer to three oh one in Commissioner Oakley's district. So I see I see a cutoff at Morris Bridge here.
And we continue to go on past Morris
Bridge. There's a New R New River Road. Is that the same one?
Yeah. So New River is closer to 301 in Commissioner Oakley's district. That's Commissioner Oakley's District.
I'd have to look around Morris Bridge.
Yeah yeah
that's not a good thing.
have to go back and look at the list.
Mr.
Chairman Mariano.
Yeah. Yes. So Terry, when I look at all these MPUDs, I mean, granted when the the Commission approves these M PUDs, they're looking to keep a balance as far as employment operating, uh employment generating facilities as well as residential with the components and we got a lot of let's say we'll we're loaded with residential. We've done a lot of apartments as well. We stopped you guys from putting a lot of storage units along fifty-four, fifty-six as well. We made it made a thing as far as protecting fifty-six, fifty-four as well with apartments. Do
we need to go further with this as far as to give you more direction of what we're really looking for as far as employment generating uh things with these MPUDs? So that maybe the matrix doesn't work out as Yeah.
Easy
for a split?
Well, I mean, in the it's it's standard protocol when the Planning Development Department establishes land use equivalency matrices in negotiation with the developers, um, that we do not uh give ground as it relates to office entitlements and uh other employment generating uses. Um so in other words, they can't trade away their employment generating uses for more retail, let's say, or for more residential. The office is the office and
it must stay. It can't be traded away. So In that sense, the land use equivalency matrix is not really hurting our employment generation potential. It's just trading other entitlements that are listed in that list for Residential or vice versa.
But
do do
we need to look at that matrix or and try to make it more beneficial to get Those things from Say apartments over two. uh more employment generating, especially when you get someone like a major major Ontario.
I mean i i we can look into that. It's it's not Currently the way it's uh Design, but I mean you can You can update the way we approach the looms. Sure.
I mean just when we look all over the county for all these things, the things we wanna have, we want employment generator, we wanna we want our people working here, not just Having more residential when I can get that other balance. So if if that's something we can control and make look at that matrix, maybe that's something we need to look at.
Yeah, I mean the the land use equivalency matrix allows for control on trip generation specifically. But and so there's there's probably mechanisms in there that we can Yeah, because I'm not looking
at just chip trip generation. I'm looking for what I want to see. Do I want to create jobs? What do I want more residential? Mr. Chairman
Mariano if I may.
I believe the planning director is providing you this as a general overview of how multifamily is currently developing. We're not in today's hearing even talking about an MPUD. So if you want to have a discussion about What you're gonna do to The M P U D is to to make them develop out more in line with what the board wants. That's the same discussion as we talked about in old business. It's a more global discussion.
Mr. County Attorney well noted. This is a very weird thing to have this coming force this way. So I got caught up in the moment. So
thank
you.
Thank thank you, Mr. County Attorney. Um
Breakdown between camels and the presentation. He's he's he's driving the money.
Well, I I'm approaching the end of the presentation itself, but you you asked a question on the breakdown of condos versus apartments. Don't you worry about it. Okay. Move on.
Um Although I I think it would be germane to understanding the multifamily context, just so um you know that the I feel sufficient. Okay. So um so that's the map. Um next slide please.
Oh that's not his presentation?
So at the February twenty twenty workshop, what what came out of that workshop was a mobility fee update at multifamily, which the fees were increased in the summer of twenty twenty. Um in July of twenty twenty we looked at what was uh uh titled the Multifamily Policy Directive. Um and I'll go into that in just a second. And then also that the thing that came out of that workshop sort of ancillary to that was a mobility fee update was begun in October of twenty twenty this year. So we're working on that currently. Um next
slide please.
Okay, so with regard to the multifamily policy directive itself. This directive was passed by the Board of County Commissioners in July of 2020. It was specifically tailored to new multifamily zoning and future land use amendments, which this would be a a case.
And the the uh the approach that was outlined in the directive was to inte integrate uh the multifamily use with a mix of employment generating land uses. And then we established a 2,000 foot zone on either side of Seth 5456 where the multifamily must be behind, either behind non-residential land uses or be vertically integrated if it was going to be on the on the roadway itself. And then the Board of County Commissioners uh said, if uh if the
planning and development department finds we need to update the company to plan or the land development code, go do it. Um then there was a subsequent um additional amendment w related to uh not an amendment, but a a uh Clarification. uh to as to when such projects as to when this directive would apply to applications in the in the queue. um which has been implemented. Um and then it said that uh when we're talking about state road fifty-four, we're talking about
gun highway to I-75. And when we're talking about state road fifty-six, we're talking about I-75 to US three oh one. The gr next slide please. The graphic that we discussed uh at the July board meetings was this one, which illustrated the the coloration that we show along I um State World 5456 illustrates that 2,000 foot buffer. So um again at the top you have from Gun Highway to Land Oakes Boulevard. In the middle you have from
Land O' Lakes Boulevard to Bruceby Downs and the third one down is from Bruceby Down Yeah. uh Gul Boulev Gall Boulevard or M U S three O One So this was the um the area within which the board intended for the multifamily policy directive to apply. And as you'll note that the subject uh property on today's agenda is located on Wesley Chapel Boulevard. No. East or excuse me,
Bruce B. Downs, south of Wesley Chapel Boulevard, east of I-75.
Three hundred and fifty feet south of us at Channel Boulevard. Mr. Chairman Mariano. And that completes my question.
So Terry or maybe the team Can you put up? Um A couple more slides. One was the current apartments that are actually area these are actually apartments, not condos or townhomes. There's a slide.
We're working on it.
Okay.
I know.
Okay, I'm gonna let you um you know what, go ahead and just move Okay, that's stuff that just went over with Terry.
Um go to the next slide.
Next slide.
Next slide.
Yeah, you just solved that one. Okay. Next slide.
Okay, so here's um Some new projects that are going up. Charleston at Wesley Chapel, two twenty eight, Cypress Creek Town Center, which commissioners I think Starkey might have mentioned earlier. 300, Aiken, M PUD 252, and Lexington Oak's 248. Those went up and they can't fill those now. Um go to the next one if you would.
You said they couldn't fill one?
Um they have signs out there that they're like crazy that they're not full.
Um next one
Um
Okay, we can we can get this one. This just shows you where the current where the the applicant is looking to build a uh apartment complex. If you see that arrow Back there, if you go to the edge of the woods, there's just a road. So if you go from Lot to lot. That already has entanglements. There's already entanglements that close. So if you look to the left The arrow. To the left of Bruce B. Downs. Oh, okay. We can do that one too. But go
back one more, please. So I can people can see that better.
About a I don't know, maybe a sandwich, yep. Commissioner Mariano? Probably less than a sandwich, actually, because you're right. More like a putter.
Probably can't get a problem.
More like a putter if you put it really hard. That parcel already has entitlements to build apartments. It's had him for years. Now you can go to the next slide.
Across the street, as we know, Wiregrass Ranch, which is across the street from Bruce B. Downs, Wiregrass has multiple timelines where apartments have not been built yet. We can go to the next slide.
Oh back up 'cause we missed one.
We missed really the One of the more important ones. Keep going back. Somehow it got skipped. Keep going back?
One more. Okay, we're missing a slide that actually shows the current Apartment complexes by name that are in the area.
It's in there somewhere.
Yeah.
It says current the slide says current apartments and area.
It was all together as one.
Uh no sir, we don't see that one in the slide deck. I Don't know how.
It was yeah, it was they sent it last night. It was all the same package. I mean they're they're actually the slides are in a row.
I guess we'll have to come back to that unfortunately. Um so I guess I'll um Sorry commissioners you can't see it. He it was sent. Um It was mentioned earlier about actual apartment complexes. Some are part of MPUDs, but a lot of them aren't part of M PUDs. In that area, I got one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen. Those are apartment complexes.
In this area where this is
proposed? In that gym in that area around District Two in that area. And previous, like I told you, ones that aren't included that are in the process right now, one, two, three, four. And then there are also
Hay Road was one that went through the Planning Commission on January 7th. This one, there's another one under staff review, and there was another pre-op for another one in the area too. So if you add all those up, you can do the numbers of how many actual apartment complexes are in that area.
Sure, do you have a map of that?
Um I do. I don't have it to Todd y yet. I'd have to email it to him. But it was part of our February 2020 workshop presentation that illustrated where all of the uh apartment complexes that the commissioner is referring to are. Um
don't have that.
And
if the we can get that if that'd be great if we have that one that one slide up so they can actually spot You got it. All right, cool. You can just show that up uh throw that up there and show the commissioners. Yeah. Going back to the workshop as Terry mentioned before. Um Again, it doesn't count the new ones that are in the process of being built as well as ones that are recently approved.
Well,
Are you talking about where it said north south east and west?
Um right if you look right now, um there you go. Mm-hmm.
And this was the data that w that you pulled from the workshop.
Yep. Yeah. That's why they're not all on there. I wanted to include that. And then I wanted to mention the ones that have been approved since then, the ones I just mentioned a second ago, plus the ones that are already going through the process. And there's others that are going through the are going through the pre-app process as well.
So these are already built.
Yes. Yes, if it's the data
from
Tegary
twenty twenty.
They're not all imputies. Why don't I why don't uh 'cause we were just like like this applicant today is just trying to rezone a one parcel.
The map that I showed with the circles is very similar to this map. But
A lot of a lot of these are not M PvDs as well.
So what does area mean? That that's a relative word. What does what does that mean?
Area around uh the district two area.
So is th these are the current apartments in District Two? These are the current apartments in four hours of what?
Yeah, so the the the study that was done back in February was to look at I believe it was uh a two mile ra one or two mile radius around the intersection of fifty four fifty six and I seventy five. So we looked at that whole Location essentially between
Uh I forget what the western limit was.
I think we stopped at Bruce B. Downs, didn't we? Yeah. Even though there's still some some in that area, apartments in
that area,
we stopped.
Um for the discussion at the workshop.
So and to put that in context I don't know how. I mean, as a a a sum of total, is it more than normal? Is it less than normal? What does that mean?
Well I I think the the total number of units, um, if I remember correctly, was somewhere between two thousand to three thousand units in just those apartment complexes that we showed. As the commissioner noted, there's more That are beyond that that one or two mile radius that we talked about. Um, but one of the things that I mentioned earlier was that there was a breakdown of the number of apartment units. Uh I think we said that there was uh
seven thousand five hundred apartment units Specific to apartments. in the county. And then out of those seven thousand five hundred or so, about two to three thousand are actually in the w in the Wesley Chapel area. If I if I read the data correctly. So And th this is something that we kinda touched upon at the workshop if I recall correctly, because it made sense that a high intensity or higher intensity land use like multifamily.
would locate close to high intensity travel corridors.
Right. Seventy five, fifty.
Seventy-five, fifty-four, fifty-six, etc. So um this is uh a a reason, not the only one, but a reason for why there's a concentration developing alo along and around the interstate area.
And what what I heard, um, a number bandied around and maybe we're gonna hear that um later, is that uh Apartments at
Percent occupied, ninety, maybe ninety eight percent.
I I don't have that data to be able to speak on that. I haven't done a market a recent market analysis to know.
Yeah. Mm. Mr. Chairman Mariano.
Yes, Mr. Martin.
Since that I mean that was brought up, I'm I'm gonna disagree with that number just because I mean it was months ago and then I know it's not your number, so um I it wasn't a scientific poll by any means. Um, but um Have a past history before I was in healthcare and and sales and medical sales, but I knew how to cold call. And uh I cold call, I think I mentioned that before at the workshop, a number of apartment complexes and I think there was I can't again eight or nine. And only one of 'em couldn't quote,
get me in in a two bedroom apartment then. All the others had out had to be a little bit more than a little bit had openings. Um and that was those were in the Wesley Chapel area. I'm not talking about the rest of the county, the Western Chapel area. Um I you look at the one at Zephyr Lysing and Oakes, I mean they're they're trying to drive you in still. You know, the signs are up. Um let's I've some it's in front of Lexington Oak. I think it's on the sheet. Yeah, that's cool. There you go. But we talked about occupancy. Occupancy. Okay.
But where are the where are the people coming from? Are they our residents? Are they coming over from Hillsborough County? Because Hillsboro County is is not building more apartments in that new Tampa area adjacent to Wesley Chapel, right? for w w whatever reason, I think they're making good decisions over there in in the city of Tampa to not allow more over there. That's my opinion. But so they're not building more. So they're coming over here. So where you know, you think about the benefit. Where is the benefit for the citizens and the
residents of Pasco County.
When you have a s area again like New Tampa that you don't see in building anymore. They made their decisions. Whatever they made their decisions. I mean they they've obviously they're not either they're not approving them or whatever they're doing. I'm not making assumptions, but they're not building them. Yeah. So
Well they go across you know, develop 'em across the line, the county line.
And they're coming here from all over the nation.
Well any any resident that isn't living here now is coming from another county. I mean I I don't I don't understand that comment.
Well you don't understand about the comment. I'm just making a fact and saying it's not beneficial.
But my question my question to Terry is um Um and I think it's important question is We put a lot of stuff in front of us that frankly is complicated. Um, so are you saying? I know what he's saying, but I'm I'm asking you the professional. Is that an appropriate number for the the investment in infrastructure or an inappropriate number? Three thousand in that area. I mean, is it abnormal? You know,
because we don't want to be have too many. Um, but we don't want to have too few because that raises the prices. It becomes unaffordable. I would say the same thing for entry level homes. Do we really want the whole county to be entry level priced homes? I don't know. But
What's is it is it an appropriate number of units? Is that what you're asking?
Yeah, I mean uh let's you know, let's say you have a neighborhood of five thousand homes and
Uh 50% of them are apartments in in an MPUD. I mean, that seems like that would be top heavy, but
Well, I don't know that I can't
heavy in that area.
I don't know that I'm qualified to make a judgment call on the appropriateness of the number of units per se. I would just underline the uh graph that I had showed previously indicating the quantities of single-family detached residential that exists in the county as compared to multifamily. Yeah. Uh huh. within the county and and we saw that in even in the South Market area specifically where this project is. Uh only one point five percent
of the land area with is zoned. For multifamily purposes. What is that?
Sorry.
One point
five percent.
Of the of the South Market
area. I mean that so
So the I mean I could just give you the data. The the appropriateness factor is ultimately I think what the vision of the community is.
Well we're
eight percent. I will say that this this is going to be an area of interest during the comprehensive plan update. um which is um beginning Um but I I I can just point to the data and illustrate to that Only one point five percent is zoned for multi family at this point. Mr. Chairman Mariano. Around I seventy five. The dots on the map would illustrate that.
And is that normal in a County that I I mean I've always heard through you know, our family was developers and um that and I've been to a lot of meetings and seminars and whatever that you concentrate your density Near the highest amount of public infrastructure expense.
Yes.
So
And that's what our comprehensive plan is I is telling us to do, essentially.
So you will see the most density along the corridors at fifty four. Fifty two, seventy five. Maybe around the intersections of forty one and forty one, nineteen And then you Radiate out lower, lower, lower, lower.
Yes.
That's what I've obviously been planning.
And that's what our
comprehensive plan is.
Asking
Mr. Chairman M W and when we set up MUDs, we are looking to get maximize the value of the property. We're trying to get employment generating things that are gonna create and add value. Pasco County for years was a bedroom community 'cause we only did residential. So I think when we set things up to be C two I think I don't think we're thinking apartments. I think we're thinking Let's get some enjoyment uh employment. generating prof uh opportunities. So I I'd just like to say, Mr. Chairman, that This has been very weird having this
whole presentation before us, before a hearing, in the middle of a hearing. to go through the all this dialogue and we haven't even heard from the applicant yet. Yeah. So I don't know why we're going this whole way word educate me now.
We hear. Let's get to the
hearing what
we're supposed to do.
So at At this time let's let's have the applicants speak.
Mr. Chairman Mariano.
Wait a minute.
I think the applicant is on WebEx. I won't talk in
He has been promoted. Barbara, are you there?
Um
Is he ready or
Did you hear
me?
There you go.
Okay. Takes a minute. Hi, Barbowell Heights, 6327, Grand Boulevard, New Pochi, Florida, 346 by 2, and I have been sworn. I have teammates with me. I'm not sure they've all been elevated. I can see it looks like Pete Pensa and Charlie Potter have been elevated, the panelists. The other two, I'm not sure where they're at, um, are Aaron Landry, my client from Mass Capital, and Steve Henry. So perhaps As we get started here we
could ask your IT team to make sure that my full team is elevated to participate as panelists.
You are good to go, Barbara.
Thank you.
Pete Pensa is going to make the presentation on behalf of Avid Group. He has a PowerPoint that uh been put together. I would agree with uh the sediments of the commissioner. This has been a strange presentation so far. Um, but I do want to say that the data that you received is received was the data from the representations of of Terry Pitos is the data you've received in the last last February when you did the workshop and you set policy over the summer based upon. So you
considered that data, you made policy regarding that data, you had public input regarding the policy you made, and we're following that policy. We haven't really done it with new data or maybe you have um it's really hard for me to tell um if if all of this was presentation of staff or if it was a if it was interjected with other presentations, but From what Mr. Pito said, it sounds like this is the data that was presented to you that you already set policy on. And we're following that policy. But not to belabor
that point, let me have um ask that Chief Pencil from Avid Group present his PowerPoint.
Yes. Hello. My name is Pete Pensa. I'm Director of Planning with ABID Group, the planners and engineers for the project. I'm an AICP certified planner. Our address is 2300 Curloo Road, Palm Harbor. Uh if you could I'll share my screen. Uh the way I
Yes, I'm sorry. Yes sir, yes I was sworn.
Thank you, sir. You may proceed.
Okay. Can I share my screen so that I can drive to PowerPoint?
Okay.
I'm gonna go through uh I'll try to be brief. It is a little bit of a long presentation. I'll keep it as short as possible. The project's located on Bruce Bowns, uh south of the fifty-four intersection. Uh we have an aerial here to show you. General area. The area to the north of our site is predominantly commercial uses along with numerous medical uses. uh integrated in the commercial areas. Uh to the southwest of us recently, uh
Blue Heron ALF, the Seven Oak Senior Living Uh is under construction for a 237-bed assisted living. And recently Baycare announced that they're going to build a 54-acre medical complex that'll employ 220 full-time employees as well as part-time employees. I like you See also to the west of us are car dealerships and to the south is uh some local
retail and Uh Town home development.
The properties located in the fifty four corridor. Uh the area as you can see on the land use map on the right has a future land use designation of mixed use. Which allows for up to 30 units per acre. And as staff talked about earlier, other constraints such as wetlands and zoning can modify what the maximum densities are that are allowed. Just want to note that the property is zone C2. uh which allows uh multifamily
as a conditional use. The property would not need rezoning. and it would maintain the C2 zoning, which does allow for commercial as well. Uh
This I went over the mixture uses, so I'll skip past that. Uh multifamily is uh compatible and complementary to those uses. It provides a transition from the the commercial uses to the north to the lower density residential to the south. Um And it is an info location uh located behind the existing commercial that fronts on fifty four. We are located in the South Market area, as staff talked about earlier, so I won't read these, but I want to just note that
it does talk about being an urban gateway, supporting transit opportunities, higher density development, compact development, and mixed use to promote a live work environment.
The multifamily policy the staff went into is not applicable to the site for a couple of reasons. Uh primarily that It's located along the 54 quarter east of I-75, which was excluded from the policy. And we're over 2,000 feet. We're actually three miles to the north of State Road 56, as you can see in the two overview maps on the slide. Uh, even though the policy is not applicable to this development. Uh I do want to
note that it does uh further the intent of the policy directive because it is located behind the non-residential uses that are already existing on State Route 54. It is an infill location. It is located along a transit corridor and I'll go into that later. And it is an area that's designated for urban development. And as I pointed out earlier, there's there's additional commercial uh employment generating uses, uh specifically the ALF and the
hospital, uh, that are gonna be generating more more demand for live work in this area.
Even though the site was rezoned back in 1984, uh it has limited commercial desirability. Uh it it's remained vacant for over three and a half decades since getting the commercial zoning. Uh and the re Part of the reason for that is because it's not located on a uh major intersection. It is a mid block location. Uh it does have wetlands uh on the Basically the southern third of the site. Uh number of constraints that make it less
desirable for commercial development that wants to cluster on 54 and at the major intersections.
Oh.
This just shows some of the other uses in the area. I won't go into those in any detail. This is the conceptual site plan that we submitted for the application, comprises of three four-story buildings with a total of 248 units. That translates to a density of approximately 24 units per upland acre. It will provide for on-site active and passive recreation areas as well as preservation of a significant amount of open
space. on the property. Pictures down at the bottom show some examples of the types of recreation amenities that are proposed with this development.
The site is located uh on a multimodal corridor. Uh the property has direct frontage on Breesby Downs, which is a DOT arterial roadway. There is an existing multi-use trail that's located on the west side of Brewster Downs, directly in front of the property, and we will connect to that. Multi use trail. Uh the The road is also uh a cor a transit corridor. There's uh bus route fifty four uh runs uh uh in front of the property
and connects to uh east-west bus routes that serve the entire county or mo most of the county. Um Breespeed Owns is currently operating at and it's projected to continue operating at an acceptable level of service. And that's per the uh the latest MPO report uh which was published in August of 2020. And the site is also not located in a hurricane evacuation zone. So it would not put uh additional demands or burden on
the transportation system or the county shelter facilities in the event of a hurricane event.
Uh For a point of comparison, we looked at uh What a typical uh suburban shopping center, something in the range of about a hundred and twenty thousand square foot. Uh what it would generate for uh trip generation utilities. This graph shows the number of trips that that shopping center would generate versus uh and that's the multicolors on the left. versus the light gray box on the right, which shows the trip
generation for the proposed apartment complex. You can see it's a significant reduction in the number of trips compared to what would be expected to develop on the property and under the late future land use. Um entitlements, the intensity of development could be greater than that if it was built for commercial.
Uh potable water, sanitary sewer, and reclaim services are all available immediately adjacent to the site. I won't go into the details, but they are listed there.
The Bartman Complex in this case is shown in the light gray on the left, uh, that same commercial scenario shown in the blue box on the right. The peak flows uh for both water and sewer would be significantly less uh for residential development than they would be for commercial, putting less burden on the county's utility infrastructure.
At the Planning Commission hearing a question came up or a number of questions came up related to school capacity. Uh Chris Williams, who's the Director of Planning Services with Pasco County Schools, uh sits on the planning board, on the planning commission, excuse me. And uh these are a few quotes. Uh to summarize it, the school board does not have an objection to uh multifamily development. Uh the he did note that multifamily has less impacts on the school system than single
family uh detached housing. and that he felt that it was a appropriate location uh for a multifamily.
The school board provided me with the uh n the uh daily attendance, daily membership numbers for the fall semester from August through July. Uh seven oaks. uh elementary and its permanent classroom capacity uh is currently operating at nine-seven percent. However, there are uh two hundred and sixty seats uh of capacity that are provided through relocatables or what's known uh as re as portable classrooms that are
existing on the property which actually uh means that they're at 70 s 70% of their existing uh capacity, including those classrooms. Uh the far right column shows that with the With this project, there would be an increase of 29 elementary school students, which would bring the permanent capacity to 101% to 73% of the existing seat capacity at the school. Uh Cypress Creek Middle has
uh plenty of capacity remaining for the additional 13 students that this project regenerate, and Cypress Creek High School has capacity for the 17 Students. Chris Williams also pointed out at the meeting that the school board is in the process of uh Preparing to uh open a um uh to develop a magnet school in the area. And there are a number of private charter schools. that have opened in the area. Uh uses while
they haven't seen a decrease in demand from the charter schools yet. They're expecting that to change uh over time.
For parks and recreation, uh that that was brought up at the Planning Commission as well. Uh it should be noted that staff evaluates and issues the concurrency capacity for parks and recreation during the preliminary site plan review process. If capacity is not available. then that has to be addressed through a uh through an agreement with the county and the school board and the developer. Uh Assume that there's capacity, which there is at this time. uh then i the project
would proceed with concurrency uh For for uh I'm sorry, I'm mixing it up. I just talked about school board. Uh they would do the capacity review for parks and recreation. Uh The county, as you know, has uh parks and recreation impact fees which are paid by the developer. Uh we did calculations for that and it'll be over $150,000 in impact fees that would be collected. And likewise the developer has to provide for neighborhood neighborhood parks and recreation
facilities on site. as part of the project. Uh should be noted that in number of the letters that you received from neighbors in adjacent development. Um They mistakenly um said that the project was located within the Seven Oaks uh DRI and community development district. That is not the case. This is not this property is not part of the C D D. and would not um have neither have the right nor an expectation
to use their recreation facilities.
Uh among the benefits of multifamily development, uh the Over three million dollars will be generated in uh impact fees. as part of developing the project and it'll add over half million dollars a year in additional property tax revenue.
Uh also the multifamily development is not eligible for homestead exemption or save our homes. So the value uh continues to rise over the years instead of being capped like it is for single family detached development.
This is a rendering of uh a similar project uh It it's it's not specific to the site, but this gives you a general idea of what the project would look like. This these are some photographs of similar type projects uh as well for to give you an idea of what it would look like. And then finally, community support. Um these were letters were provided in the record, uh Blue Heron Senior Living. provided a letter in support of the project, uh and
then likewise uh Baycare was a Chapel Hospital provided a letter in support of the project as well. Uh with that that concludes my presentation and I can answer any questions you may have.
Okay. Any questions for the board?
No, I I just want to hear public comment. I mean I I will say well, no, this is your public comment. I don't have any questions.
Okay. We have public comment, we have emails or
Um no one at the WebEx, but we did have um seven emails submitted asked to be read into the record and 17 were for receive and file.
Yeah.
Mm-hmm.
Would you like me to
Yes, go ahead and read this in and directly.
Okay, so the first email is from Mark McBride.
Red uh address is [address removed].
Dear Commissioners, I'm writing on behalf of Seven Oaks Property Owners Association, SOPOA, on our opposition to Advent Health Systems request to change the zoning on property they own in Seven Oaks to multifamily. Seven Oaks is a master planned community that is over ninety-five percent complete. Our community was strategically planned properly, placing various zoning codes, ensuring a proper balance to enhance the community feel we have. Currently, there are three projects entertaining zoning changes. Approving
this project creates a slippery slope of which the residents overwhelmingly do not support. Approving these measures jeopardize the community we have and purchased into. What good is a zoning code if it is changed at a developer's whim? I spoke with Eric Wangsness, CEO of Advent Health, and discussed SOPOA's opposition. mister Wangsness understood our perspective, is fully aware of our contention in this to this matter, and expressed his desire to maintain
goodwill with the community. Unfortunately, Mr. Wangsness is not the decision maker on this project. We are not against all apartments. The Seven Oaks master plan has designated areas for multifamily dwellings, some of which were previously built. In fact, land remains available, which is currently zone multifamily. Adding an additional area will open the door for additional change and overwhelm this area with multifamily structures directly conflicting with the intent
of our master plan. I urge you to deny this request and support the current master plan's intent. Thank you, Mark McBride.
Okay.
Second email I have is for Gary Otoline. Address is [address removed].
Putting apartments on the land next to the hospital on the north end of Seven Oaks will lower our home prices, totally unfair to existing homeowners. In addition, the added traffic would be dangerous on already overcrowded roads. The added road noise would be unbearable to homes along the road. The police already cannot control the speeding in the area's roads. Thank you, Gary Otoline.
The third email that I have is from Kendra Haas or Haas. And uh her address is [address removed].
Hello County Commissioners. I am one of many residents in of Seven Oaks who is against more apartments right next to our community. We are not against apartments or renters. We already have apartments in Seven Oaks and there is land available and zoned for additional apartments in the north part of Seven Oaks. We simply don't need any more. Please vote no to rezoning our neighborhoods.
Uh I'm sorry. Please vote no to rezoning so our neighborhood is not altered further. Thank you.
The fourth email I have is from Victoria Knight. Address is [address removed].
Whom it may concern, please reject the rezoning request for parcel zero seven dash two six dash zero zero zero zero dash zero zero three zero zero dash zero zero one zero and eighteen dash two six dash two zero dash zero zero zero zero dash zero zero one zero zero dash zero zero one zero Thanks. The zoning was put in place after what we can assume was careful consideration and deliberation at the time. Nothing has changed in the community for a rezoning to even be considered.
The community at large should be what the commission is concerned with, and unless something drastically changes, the zoning should be kept consistent. I'm not against apartments or renters. We already have apartments in Seven Oaks and there is land available and zoned. to zone for additional apartments in Seven Oaks and other areas of Wesley Chapel. Therefore there is no reason for the commission to consider rezoning those parcels of land. I would like this email to be read into the record at the oh sorry, at the january twelfth meeting with the with this item to be heard. Sincerely, Victoria Knight.
The fifth email that I have is from Shane Mehan. Address is [address removed]. Good afternoon. I would like this email to be read into the record at the January twelfth meeting when this item is is is heard. As a resident of Seven Oaks, I would like to strongly urge you to deny the approval of the rezoning of the land to be made available for apartments. With the new development of the Bay Care Hospital, I'm concerned not only with the area being saturated,
but for the safety of my fellow residents. In addition, there is already a cause for concern with the current traffic accidents, which will only increase based on the projected number of Bay Care hospital visitors when When the project is completed, we feel that with the addition of an apartment complex residence, it will certainly cause an issue. that will definitely not be positive for anyone when it comes down to safety. With the current construction, with the hospital alone, it has taken some of the beauty away from our gorgeous community. That was the factor of why we purchased
our very first home here. With all of the new developments, we are forced to make a decision whether to stay or go. The short the short period of time since we have been here that truly saddens me and my wife as we love our community and neighbors. We understand that land is available and is owned by someone, but also strongly feel that we as residents will suffer the most. We too have been renters before, as I am sure we all have. But let's face it, renters are not homeowners. I urge the denial
that it be rezoned for residential for residential due to the fact that renters are not owners and the pride of maintenance does not compare. Apartment complex or not. There is no comparison.
Okay, the sixth email that I have is from Unique. Uh hacker and address is [address removed].
Seasons greetings. It has been brought to my attention that developers would like the zoning laws changed so that so the so they can build apartments in the vacant lots in Seven Oaks. I'm not sure how many elected officials live in Seven Oaks or the Wesley Chapel, but we are not short of homes. Our lovely communities are being overrun and overwhelmed by all of the new construction that you are approving. You may consider the overbuilding of an area a positive thing, which it can be, but Over building. which
is what you are approving, is a whole other thing. Along with the overpopulation comes increase in crime, increase in accidents, more panhandlers, our lovely communities being trashed, more abandoned buildings, et cetera. And in some areas you can start seeing the effects. I'm asking you to put yourself in my place. Wesley Chapel is a great family community and we would like it to remain as such. Please consider voting against the changes, the zoning uh changing the zoning laws. Thank you for your time, registered voter.
And
the way
we have
The seventh and last email is from Susan Schmidt's address is
[address removed]. Dear County Commissioners, as resident of Seven Oaks in Wesley Chapel, I urge you not to zone the land being sold by Advent Hospital to those who wish to build apartments. We have plenty of rental units in the area for the infrastructure. Since we moved to Wesley Chapel in two thousand four, we have watched e n enormous growth. The infrastructure had not kept up with the influx of people. The roads are more congested and the behavior behind the wheel more aggressive. Doctors,
dentists' appointments are difficult to acquire. Two months Uh two months to see a specialist in the area or get a cavity filled. Our children have been re-redistricted, losing their schools. Please don't add these additional people to at this time just for revenue. Rentals also bring more transience rather than stable families, which are the backbone of safe and altruistic communities. Thank you so much, Cameron and Susan Schmitz.
Is that all the ones?
That is the uh ones that have been asked to be read into the record.
Okay, and how many do we have um receive and file?
There are seventeen. Seventeen. Seventeen.
All right. I need a motion on the seventeen emails to receive and file.
Can I ask a question on that real quick, Mr. Chairman? Okay. How many of the seventeen were for or against the project? Because I think I saw it on a graph.
I don't have that information.
Well I've looked through them all and they're all against.
Mr. Chairman Mariano. Yeah. I don't see a I didn't see a resident. Going the other way with it.
I gotta see one positive. Five most receiving file.
And a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion pat.
Mr. Moore, or com Commissioner Moore, the
The listing that you were provided uh
Shows that all of the emails that were received were against, if that's in the for or against column. Thank you.
Oh my apologies. It was noted on the document. I did not notice that. Thank you.
Okay.
Mr. Chairman Mariano. To humor me, if we can check the kiosk to see if there's anybody there, and then it would be applicants rebu rebose.
There is no one at the kiosk.
All right, thank you. One at the Kia, so
It wouldn't know, it would be applicants rebuttal at this point. Okay. Ms. Wilhate?
This is Barbara Wilhate. Can you hear me?
Yeah. We
thank you, Commissioner. A couple of things I wanted to point out, and I do have other team members here. I have Aaron Landry from Mass Capital. um who is the actual client and developer of this property. The extent you have any questions for him. I have Steve Henry, who um is the transportation engineer. With regards to traffic, Mr. Pen Pete Pence's presentation explained that this is a decrease in trips from the current zoning. Um again, if you have any specific questions, because so it's you
have neighborhood opposition that always says things about traffic, but this is actually a decrease in trips. um over the current over the C two zoning. So but Steve Henry is here if you have any specific questions other than what um Pete has gone went over his presentation. I want to point out a couple things. This is not a change in zoning. We've heard over and over and over in the the things read into the record that we're changing zoning. The property has a C2 zoning district. Your C2 zoning district allows multifamily, contemplates multifamily. and
says you have to go to a conditional use permit, not a rezoning, not a land use amendment. We have land use and zoning in place that allows for multifamily subject to getting the conditional use permit that we've applied for. We are not in the seven oak C R I some of the correspondence that I read from the residents were confused that somehow we were in Seven Oak C R I. We were or was we were in the Seven Oak C D. They thought we would be taking away the capacity at their clubhouse. This is a standalone project, um, not
within the seven oaks master plan. This pro this particular property as as Pete Pence was uh told you and showed you in his PowerPoint presentation, has been zoned since the eighties. It's um Good. was zoned in the eighties by the Porter family. When they owned the property? It sits outside of where you do commercial nodes now. This is pre-comp plan. And uh it's as Mr. Penny told you it's not a location for a good location for commercial and the history of the fact that it's
been sitting there all that time tells that tells you that as well. I would note that you went through and said how many um residents had had reached out to the county But I re what I reviewed and I don't know if I was made aware I was given everything, but every piece of paper that I was given by staff that would be part of your record today I reviewed and I looked up every person who where they live. And they all live in the the single family detached portion of Seven Oak. Seven Oak has
a southern portion and a northern portion. The northern person portion cuts off at Eagleston Boulevard, where Baycare. Baycare is selling the works of Eagleston Boulevard. And there's actually two associations. There's a Seven Oak Property property associ
Thirty two thirty two property association north. Our neighbors are the North two thirty two Property Owners Association. We are not adjacent to these um to the single family detach. Baycare is in between us. We're about a thousand feet from Baycare, which will be Baycare is in support. Baycare is our neighbor. Seven um the the uh group from Blue Heron, the senior living is our neighbor.
They're in support. There's town homes that are our neighbor. Never didn't receive any opposition to them. And so our actual neighbors are not in opposition. I have not seen any opposition from them. So while there's single family detach in the single family detach portion of Seven Oaks, This northern portion where we're actual we're actually locating, uh we have not received any opposition. Our Planning Commission recommendation was five to one. Um Mr. Roberto Sayez um voted against
the the application, disclosing that he lived in Seven Oaks and that he had uh personal reasons why he didn't support it from his own opinion. Um with regard to the the data that was presented um that I received about five minutes before um the hear public hearing started. I think some of the noteworthy things is what what Mr. Petos was trying to summarize for you, which is the South Market area. That's one point
one one point five one percent of the acreage in the multifamily districts. Then you break that down, you look at okay, what's M F one, M F two, and MF three? eighty five percent of that is MF one. My clients developed townhomes in MF One. So they fifteen percent of that acreage for multifamily M F two and M F three is what we we do apartments in. Two thirds of those acres, notwithstanding the zoning being MF two and MF three, two thirds of those
acres are in res six and res nine. Those are what my my clients do townhomes in. My clients don't do apartments in Res six and res nine. So Um, while there's a lot of ac a big acres number in acres, not so much in percentage of your South Market area. Very little bit of that available is available to markets for apartments. You've heard some data regarding um M PUDs, but the data was with the broad definition of multifamily that includes Um, everything other than single
family detach. So and I would just point out that remember this is the data that that you did receive as a board and workshop. Now Mr Fitzpatrick was not part of the board at that time. But the remainder of the board did receive that data and actually adopted a policy which is only you know, six months old. And um And that's the policy we're following. So we as your staff has said, we meet the criteria in the comprehensive plan, we meet the
criteria in the land development code. Um, we have a recommendation of approval from Planning Commission. They actually thought it was the statements from some of your planning commission members were things like, this is exactly the way you tell us to plan. Transitional land use planning, mixed use, walk to work, walk to retail. Um I just thought this was a good location for multifamily as a as a toolboard.
Mr. Chairman, shouldn't rebuttal be limited to response to the public comment? We're going back to Terry's comments. That we're rebutting that and that's already been Done. Yeah. So rebuttal's supposed to be limited to two.
You're covering everything, aren't you, Barbara?
I I am on uh I had to have a chance to um be able to read and absorb what Terry Tito said because I wasn't made available to me. So y you know, as a matter of process being able to actually look at it while my other teammates were presenting, I was trying to look at it and be able to summarize for you. There's no way I could do that on the fly because of how it was presented without the applicant having any ability to review it ahead of time. So um
I I have a question, Mr. Chairman Mariano. Mr. Moore. You mentioned there was people there, Barbara. Um, is there anybody there from Advent Health that's on the line? So they're listed as they're listed as the applicant. Is there anybody there from Advent Health System?
No,
I'm
their a I'm their I'm their agent of records.
Oh okay. So you represent the do you represent the Apartment comp or the apartment developer or Advent Health?
So I represent the apartment developer. The application has to be in the name of the property owner. So your rules require me to get an agent of record form from the property owner. So I am an agent of record. Um for the property owner, my I represent the contract purchaser, which is um cap which is mass capital.
Okay, thank you.
Yeah, goes it back to the board now.
Okay. Back to the board. What's the pleasure of the board?
Well so I I just wanna since we're back to the board now, I just want to uh Pull look at a couple of things. I I actually um being from the healthcare industry and spending a lot of time in the healthcare industry, um
understand how to, you know, look up in the Florida Department of Health database and talk about um nurse licenses is so that was brought up earlier. So just for the For the board. Um And the zip codes 33544, 45, 43, 39, 37, and 47 that surround the area. There are actually 4,755 active RN license and LPN license. So there's no shortage. When you talk about a hospital next door, because they they brought that up. Um the apartment
developer brought it up, the applicant brought it up. About 250 employees there, then a two and four fifty employees. 250 employees will encompass physicians, nurses, whether it be RNs, LPNs, as well as therapists, as well as CNAs, in addition to a very large majority of clerical staff, billing, et cetera. So there's no shortage of RNs and LPNs that live nearby. I just wanted to be able to respond to that. I don't know I could go on for a while, but
I don't know if anybody else has any other comments before I Continue on. I'll
defer to you first.
Okay. And if you look at if you're not going to be able to Terry, I guess I need staff back up for a second, if you don't mind. I Or somebody from staff, Terry, if you don't mind. If you go back to sh show us the um Map. of the proposed project that also includes the corner of Bruce B. Downs. In fifty four In it which intersects like w you know, Wesley Chapel Boulevard, fifty R speed down fifty four. You can if you just bring up one of the maps of the project, I think
you have that road included, that intersection included.
Uh you're referring to the map of the M PUDs with the circles? Sorry,
w no no no. The the whether wherever you p you showed the project, whether it's your your your slide. I think it's yeah, your slide of the project. Yeah. That shows the long Bruce B. Downs.
Todd, that'll be in the um in this project's uh presentation. So not the workshop presentation, but the very first one we did.
Okay,
we're
trying to get it up. Yeah, the the one that was Yeah. So for Planning Commission and here and everything then. Correct.
Sorry, I just wanna sh I just wanna show the road for a second.
Uh next slide.
Next slide. But here's one type of map, not the area. Gosh, we don't have a one more. All right, let me get my
glasses on. Mm-hmm. That's the Okay. That's perfect. Thank you so much. Okay. So if you see where the project, the proposed project is located, it does front um Bruce B. Downs. I know they kept mentioning it uh s for some reason they said it fronted commercial, but there's no it does not front any commercial. It's Bruce B. Downs right there. Um If you go towards what you tell a boulevard and State Road 54, I don't I would assume they're gonna have uh their ingress,
egress, they're gonna use Eagleston Boulevard to come out. So we talk about traffic and and the dangers in that area. At that corner currently right now there's no saying no. Uh right. Right now there's no signal. You have to cross through four lanes of of traffic and then go thro through that medium. Now going to Wesley Chapel Boulevard on the state road fifty four, I think each and every one of us have heard, if if not Maybe Commissioner Fitzpatrick hasn't yet, but you will. Um, the
dangers of that intersection of 54 and and West Chi Chapo Boulevard, the amount of traffic that p piles up, it makes it impossible across the street at Publix to get out. So you have to leave Publix. And cross a median while traffic is backed up. You can't get it out of there. It's impossible. So when it comes from a traffic and a safety and a public safety perspective, it's a terrible, terrible location, in my opinion, this time. Now in the future in the future, there could be a traffic signal there. I'm aware of F
dot talking about it, but we're talking about right now and right now there isn't. Um so that highly cons that highly concerns me. So I I have You know, when we talk about and and Mr. Steiner even kind of brought it up earlier today and and I know when we Have um Land use items that some of us object to. We want to make sure we that we're citing land development code and the c and or the comprehensive plan when we're making these decisions. So I've done that today. So I'm gonna make a motion to deny P eighty three.
I have some
questions.
Well, I I don't want to do it under discussion. Let's still I mean I have questions for the applicant. I
Well we already went past the app questions for the applicant.
I haven't had my say on this.
No, I mean didn't we leave the questions?
Well, can you um So let me go ahead and say something. Can you put that map back up? Please. Um so I've met with the applicant. And It's it was at my request that they put that connection to Eggleston because Uh with the hospital coming. um in anticipation of people being employed there, plus the other employment sites all around this, like the car dealers and the mall
here. It was my desire that the uh people who may live here could access the employment sites without going on boosby downs. So I asked that connection to be made to Eccleston.
Is
there a
connection there?
Well, it's on their on their site plan they show a road. I'm going to Eggleston. Uh over here. See up here? To at the very top to the right. That I mean, so that would allow for them to continue on and connect
to
Eggleston.
On the
upper
right hand corner, you're talking about S connection.
At the top right. So it also allow when this piece comes in for development and I'm sure this is gonna be commercial. Um because it's a it's a break here. Um that the people in the apartments here could access by walking. Um Whatever happens when this gets developed. Uh could you put the map up please that Commissioner Moore had with the yellow arrows? Pointing to the multifamily Coming
in the area. 'Cause I have a question for Terry on that one.
So it's zoned. It that that isn't there yet. It's already has the entitlement.
Could you put the map up with the yellow line? Yes,
ma'am, we're working on it.
Okay. But they don't um
Yeah, so we were just told that this was um be another apartment complex, but from what I saw on the applicant site, that is a multifam, that is an A senior ALF?
Nope. That's not it.
That not it?
The seniors the seniors already almost built. That's a different parcel. That parcel's villain multifamily. The the senior That would be the
Is that different?
It's different. They
have
an ALF, a SNF, and possibly some IL. That's almost completed. They're actually taking applications now.
Is that is that south of there?
Um if you zoom out a little bit. I don't um it's down okay, so you see where well's now you gotta look at um this right here, it's this construction right here. That's a construction. The road separates it. Yeah, that right there. See there? That's during construction.
Is that considered multifamily or is that something different?
Different. They rezoned that property away from the property. Yeah, I think that's it's considered differently.
Definitely. Okay. Um for me I didn't see this as a bad site for apartments. Um you're certainly not gonna put single family homes uh fronting Bruce B. Downs. Um There's employment opportunities all around them than they could get to without ever going on. Um Bruce B. Downs if they use that back road. Um you got the highway right there. Who wants to listen? You that's not gonna be Thanks,
Bancy Holmes back there. Um so I I was okay with this. Uh Yeah. I am interested in seeing the total amount of units within a certain area and I If it's only one point, what'd you say, Terry? One point
For for what? County?
Um in in the in the Market area there was one point three percent.
What one point five one percent is zone multifamily in the south market area.
Yeah, so you know, multifamily is many things and I I think that's a low appropriate number. I deal with people who are trying to find Um housing and f have it. Very difficult, so I'm not sure that this area is overbuilt for this price point. I think most of the housing around here is actually very expensive. So it's in proximity to two big transportation corridors. And
75. Well for those reasons I'm I'm okay with it, but I am looking forward to a workshop to go into um Everything more in detail in the future.
Yeah commission uh commissioner oh uh commissioner that's a
bambo You know, when I look at the right-of-way, I think. When we try to set up M PUDs and and developments, we're looking for I'll create it pretty much in a input in PUD. When I look at right on an arterial With the connection that we have right there. it it screens for something commercial. A job creator. Maybe there's some type of thing. I mean it a bank right next to it. Who knows what can be there, but on that road, when you look at Seven Oaks, Probably the best developed community In the nation,
maybe. Uh the mudderum numbers they have exceed what we put on our our own standards. They do so well at it. And with that community being directly next to it with apartments still available. uh definitely would be more applicable. I know it's not the same MPUDs, not the same DRI, but what I'm saying is to throw that much more residential in an area where the Commissioner O How many years we struggle if you've have any events at Sidelberg you're coming down for fifty two, fifty four, try to get past that intersection, you're done. It would take me more time to
go from Hudson to get to that intersection, to get to Saddlebrook. than it did from that point right there. So the traffic's phenomenal. The Diverging diamond down the road. That's gonna be a ways coming. The intersection. uh right down to the south is is booming to throw more residential traffic when we're trying to create jobs in this community and trying to create Uh less trips doesn't seem seem right. When I look at US nineteen More fat more fatalities
than anywhere as far as a roadway goes. Part of it was you had six lanes or even eight lanes of road going up and down. And people who kind of drew U turns to come back and around. So whether they're gonna make the U turn to get back down or taking the light at Eagleston. there's gonna be more traffic. When you look at the neighborhood of Seven Oaks, if people are gonna come in and they're gonna try to avoid that big intersection one way or the other, they may be going through that neighborhood a lot more. And try to get try to get guessed Sam's down there. You can have 30 cars in
line. You're still stuck out there. So you get a community that's been built very well right beside it. You're going to take this one little out parcel that's here, designed for commercial, and put more residential. I just don't think it fits. I think there's a lot of adverse effects between property values, between traffic, uh, the congestion, health, safety, welfare of the community that I I I won't be supporting this. Thank you.
So you kind of said things backwards because we just learned that With this kind of um use, there's less on Bruce Downs that would be if it's commercial. And that that actually would not be a good place for commercial uh because it's too far for the main intersection. That's just strip zoning, but it might be a good place for office, but I wouldn't say commercial. Um
well if I could Commission.
So isn't there another road coming that's gonna relieve Bruce Bowns that goes up and connects to State Road 54 that hasn't been built yet but it's coming right.
There's yeah it'll be several years probably. There's a road coming off Bruce Bowns that goes around and connects to fifty four. And also
So um in a year and a half, I mean this won't be built for years, so about the same time the road will probably be about twenty years from now. Twenty
years.
We will also have another interchange on State Road on uh US on 75 that will also relieve the traffic down below on overpass. So Um and there's Boost me downs. Is it an F-road? Just
It's a it's a thing.
We actually need to speak. Somewhere here the applicant needs to be able to speak.
So I that traffic is not
we're in we're in the we're in discussion for the commissioners now. We're Pasco
but I get to object to
the
record. I do get to speak and
Yes. Yeah. We can't rebuttal what when we're just we're just seen like we're
missed too much. We need to just go forward. So
we we don't rebuttal when we're having in in commissioners discussion.
I can I get to object for the record, Commissioner.
Nobody cut her off. I don't know what happened.
Well that's because you keep I keep getting cut off. Which I need to object to the record. I I'm an attorney here.
You can
Can you hear me?
Nobody's cutting you off, Barbara. Continue with
your objection.
Yeah, I know you can hear me now but but staff keeps cutting me off. I can see it on my end. So my concern is that a couple things.
All right. Can you hear me now? Yeah.
We've been here again. Yes.
Okay, all right. So I have a couple of things I need to say. So One commissioners? more states. He's not summarizing any testimony of anybody who's appeared before you. He's after my public hearing is closed, after I've had the opportunity to speak, he's he's presenting new facts to you. We don't have access to Eagleson. Um We're not Commissioner Starkey has a question, Sunday asked me, which is level serophone breach be down to the C and I also want to say the whole presentation that preceded ours,
which is really a workshop presentation. If you all want to have your workshop and get the facts a lot of stuff we're throwing out here today, we're not opposed to a con you know, to a continuance. so that you can get your facts and make sure that everybody on the board understands the facts. Mr Fitzpatrick wasn't on the board because he went to the last on workshops. So I I'm not trying I just wanna be fair to you all but also fair to my clients. And it's been a a little bit of a difficult hearing I I know for for myself and
my clients. So I wanted to get that out there and um and say that. So I appreciate you giving me the time to do that.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman Mariano Just going back, we talked about Eagles. I didn't say there wasn't access to Eagles. I said Eagles was dangerous. You can get on you get on Eagleston, and if you go across Eagleston, across those four lanes. There's a median there, there's no traffic signal. So it makes it dangerous to go from Eagleston across the street and go to Bruce B. Downs if you're going towards Wesley Chapel Boulevard.
That's the opposite way. I'm talking about going left. Right. That would be much
that would be good.
Okay, real
quick with the Eagleston at the top northeast area that Ms. Commissioner Starkey had mentioned. They don't own that property. So are we gonna allow them to add a street there to so they're not cutting across Bruce Bowns ever? It's all going they're all gonna go come out of the neighborhood onto Eaglesend. They're not gonna be going directly onto
Right now it's an interna it it amounts to being an interneighborhood tie. It's a connection it's shown on their site plan, but unless they had the permission of the adjacent property owner
they
can't. They're not gonna be able to to make that That connection.
But Mr.
Chairman Mariano was no matter what, I mean they can that's fine. They I mean they make that's something they'd work out with, you know, the adjacent landowner. If you go on Eagleston and you want to go North. On a Bruce B New Horth on Bruce B. Downs, you have to cross two lanes across the median to turn left. If you come out Eagleston, there's no other way to go through there. You have to I mean if you're on Eagleston, if you hang a right, you're not crossing you're not crossing, obviously, right? It's a right turn, you're
in the lanes. If you go left, you have to cross the two lanes or the three two lanes of traffic. Go across the meeting, hang a left. There's no single. That was the point I made.
Whether it's commercial Residential Office and the least impact on traffic is the residential. So that argument. Doesn't fly if you're gonna use that reason. That can be
it's not an argument. I'm just telling you the facts. It wasn't that's not that's not
listed in the fact is there's less traffic with the apartment complex than any other use. Okay unless it's a park. Not
above office, not of office. Mr. Chairman? Yeah, sure. Yeah, and just to clarify, what I said I I didn't say trips, I said congestion. And I'm talking about the people that are going in that apartment, they're gonna be traveling through Seven Oaks that otherwise normally wouldn't go through. Your regular commercial traffic, if they're going in and out of there, will come off Bruce B Downs from 54, 56, wherever it may be, getting in there. I'm just talking about the congestion for the residents beside it. There'll be there will be more traffic going through that neighborhood than than there is currently. And again, that's back to do we want to create
employment jobs or are we looking for more residential? Mr. Chairman
Mariano's discussion. Um that's a good point.
Mr.
Chairman
Mr. Chairman
Mariano.
Just wait a minute, Barbara.
I mean we're when we're it when we're here when we're here At a regular public hearing. And we're having discussion or discussion amongst commissioners. We don't have staff or or applicants running up to the podium talking. This is our time now. Right. Am I not correct, Mr. Stein? You usually
don't make up facts. It's very unusual for me to watch a commission make up facts. We actually have an expert that actually can give you the real facts.
Mr. Sti Mr Stuart.
At this point they're in com they're in commissioner discussion, Barbara.
So Um I'm gonna make a motion to deny this, but it has nothing to do with it. It's not gonna point to what I just talked about at all. There's we were talking about we w the points we're just making of w which is a fact going across the road, you cross two lanes of highway. I mean it's it's it's right there, right? It's it's um So the applic the application is inconsistent with section four oh two point three F one Of the Land Development Code and Policy F L. U. one point eight point seven of the comprehensive plan economic
development because the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed conditional use for multifamily will contribute more to the county in revenue than it will consume in services. Relative to the non residential uses allowing by the existing C two zoning. Number two, the application is inconsistent with section four oh two point three F point one Of the Land Development Code and Policy one point eight. point one zero of the comprehensive plan preservation of capacity for employment generating uses. Because the proposed conditional
use for multifamily will consume land and transportation caspe that has c the county must ensure is available for employment. Generating land uses. Number three, the application is inconsistent with sections 402.3F.2.
And four oh two point three point um f point four and four oh two point three point f point eight of the land development code because the proposed conditional use will add more students to an elementary school That is already At the capacity and right at capacity and increased traffic or parking and congestion around the elementary school, therefore the proposed multifilm use would adversely affect the quality of life and safety safety of those students and employees at that elementary school. Although the application has not met its burden of demonstrating
consistency with the land development code and comprehensive plan for the reasons I previously stated, the evidence also demonstrates that denying the proposed conditional use. And retaining the existing C2 zoning will serve legitimate public purposes, including preservation of the County's Alabelorum tax base, preservation of land and transportation capacity for employment generating land uses. i.e. in economic development and ensuring the safety of the students and employees of the elementary school. That's my motion.
I'll second with a little discussion.
And I have discussions.
Is there a second to this motion?
Okay. So my discussion would be on the signature sheet, which the Chairman's gonna be looking at.
I got a motion on a second, but
we have a discussion right now. Along with that, when this the Chairman's gonna have to sign the sheet, the signature sheet that we have, it it talks about the proposed conditional use will adversely affect or contribute to the deterioration of the quality of life of property dice in the immediate neighborhood. Uh number four, the proposed conditional use. Will create excessively increased traffic or parking congestion as well as affect public safety. In number eight.
The proposed conditional use will adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the surround community or area.
Wow, I think y'all are trembling. Tobel troubled water. I wonder if the attorney can speak up, but we already have testimony. From the school school representative on the planning commission, this will not affect adversely affect the schools that there's capacity. We um I don't know how you how that you said it's gonna affect the health of anyone around them when this is less traffic on Boosby Downs than any other use. What was the other thing that you threw out there? What
was the other?
We have a motion in a second, so I mean
obviously you're going the other way. Very elitist and improper. not everyone can live in a five hundred thousand dollar gated community and I you know, we're tr we get we're going down this path that I think is really dangerous. Rude, inappropriate, and I Uh and You know, I I think we should continue this. I think you presented a lot of information that might have been confusing to some and and that we need to
have be able to talk more in a workshop setting because obviously some people aren't understanding that what you were saying. And I I would like to suggest that we continue this and and I don't think the applicant was able to really present. the way they would have liked. And I just think this is a travesty here today and I'm I'd love to see if we might consider
Well to I would like to pipe in right here. I I felt like I was in a workshop to begin with and we're actually here on it.
But um I think the project fits. I think the project's good. I don't think the traffic would be a problem. I don't think there's gonna be any issues with the schools. And I think it fits in the neighborhood of um where it's located. And it fits a puzzle. So very good project far as I'm concerned.
Well Mr. Chairman Mariano, you know, like name you know, I cited land development code multiple times.
I understand.
And the comprehensive plan multiple times. Yeah. So there's a motion there's a motion and second.
Okay, I have a motion. If I may, since the commissioner asked, the the criteria cited by Commissioner Moore, I believe, is defensible. Um, I don't know that there was any Competent substantial evidence about transportation issues um that Commissioner Mariano was adding to the motion. Um but the but the uh criteria within the land development code about economic development
and the and uh in four oh two point three um is what that provision what those provisions say. Mr.
Mariano. I will withdraw my addition to the motion. Do you wanna? I'll withdraw my addition to the motion.
Okay.
So it's just my motion as it stands. Yep.
Your motion stands, he's seconded. I've got a motion and a second to deny this project. I don't know if this is asking. All those in favor say aye.
Aye. Aye.
All opposed say nay. Nay. Nay. Oh, we missed a boat. Did you vote?
Uh The motion on the floor is for denial.
Of the conditional use. They've already got C two zoning. They need this conditional use to get Multifamily on this site. And so that's what they were in are before you today for.
So if you vote no
Mr.
No, well under explain to her if you vote yes. It's dead. If you vote no, it goes forward.
That's well no. If you vote if you vote yes on the motion, it is denied. If it if you vote if it's tricky.
If you vote nay, you would have to bring it back up as a
So that so there would have to be a second motion to approve. Right, to approve. But that's after with this
motion.
Yeah. Do I need to restate my motion again?
I don't think so. I don't think so. It's up
to you.
Clark got it right.
We did. We're not going on this motion. That's right. The the the Commissioner Moore did not Did not put on the floor staff recommendation. What commissioner It was It was number three of the memo, which said, you may deny this conditional use. That's what the commissioner's motion was. Um, and so that's what you're voting on.
Yeah.
Can you repeat the motion just like the main gist of it?
Well So the m
You
Yeah, well I would I okay. I I'll do I'll I have no problem doing it again. I have no problem. That's fine. I'll talk slower. I know I I go fast sometimes. Um my motion is to deny My motion is to deny the application. And I cited four reasons why. And do what Mr. Steinsteiner tried to read over him again? It's your call. That's
up to
the if you would like me to read over again, Commissioner, I'm I'm h happy to. Okay.
Oh I f I cited four reasons why in the land development code. And the comprehensive plan why it should be denied. And that was my motion.
No.
Your vote nay? Well, well, I don't think
I'm not gonna deny at this point.
So you're voting against the motion that's on the floor. which is to deny it.
What what that's going to be
you're going with Commissioner Starkey and Commissioner Oakley, not with Commissioner Mariano and
It's And now we have to have another vote. Is that correct?
Well we're trying to be sure of her vote.
Oh you're doing that again. I'm gonna call Robert's rule. She voted no.
Well
You voted no.
Yeah.
She's an adult and she voted no. Okay. And
now we have to have I do agree with the project because it's next to advent health. I mean the hospital and it's in walking distance so it's to not create more
You voted right. When you said no, you voted for for that reason. With the with the nays. Yes.
Nay to deny.
Okay. Mr.
Chairman
M
question? Umless
we continue to do this again.
Sixty days. So next time we're back we'll look at it.
I'll s second that motion. Since we seem to I've come to a I've I understand a little confusion at the end, I have no problems continuing.
Okay.
Well
Well I got a motion and a second.
Not too much. Yeah, I'd like to ask clarification from the county attorney because this is uncharted territory. Um So if we have voted to deny
Um
We have it.
What what does it take to approve the request?
You'd have to vote against the motion to continue. And then you could vote to approve.
For then you could make another motion to approve. But the motion that the motion that's on the floor right now is the continuum.
I would like to make a motion to approve. So then I would vote no on the right-of-way. Wait a minute. I will
wait a minute. We're going to first go over the motion. To continue And we have us We have a motion by Commissioner Oakley.
I would like to second that so I can thoroughly do my research.
No. So the motion on the floor is to continue it for 60 days. That there's been a there's been a
motion and a second.
It's already been seconded.
Okay.
It's already been seconded. Mr. Moore seconded it. That's all those
in favor say aye.
Aye.
I'll I'll Uh like time for those against? None against so it passed to continue for 60 days 5-0.
That's what we have. I feel like I've been in a workshop. I don't think I should have been in.