Zoning Hearing Master - Regular Meeting

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] THANK YOU. PLEASE HAVE A SEAT.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. I WANT TO WELCOME YOU TO THE JANUARY TWUX 26TH, 2026, ZONING HEARING MASTER HEARING. MY NAME IS SUSAN FIRB, AD I'LL BE -- FINCH, AND I'LL BE PRESIDING AS THE HEARING MASTER OVER TONIGHT'S CASES. LET ME START BY INTRODUCING MS. MICHELLE HEINRICH. SHE IS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT. SHE WILL INTRODUCE OTHER STAFF MEMBERS THAT WILL PARTICIPATE IN TONIGHT'S HEARING AS WELL AS GO OVER ANY OFF THE AGENDA CHANGES. MS. HEINRICH?

GOOD EVENING, MICHELLE HEINRICH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. UP AT THE DAIS WITH US WITH THE DEARN'S OFFICE WE HAVE MARY DORMAN. AND JERRY DELFINO WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, NEXT TO JARED IS ALEXIS MYERS, AND WITH TRANSPORTATION STAFF ON THE OTHER SIDE WE HAVE JAMES RATLIFF. AND I DO JUST HAVE ONE REVISION TO THE AGENDA TO ANNOUNCE, AND THAT'S FOR AGENDA PAGE 9 ITEM D.4, PD25-0934. THE AGENDA IS BEING CORRECTED TO CORRECT THE APPLICANT AND THE SERVICE AREA, & IT IS CORRECT IN ORREPORT. WE'RE JUST MAKING IT CONSISTENT ON THE AGENDA.

ALL RIGHT, TH PERFECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. LET ME START BY GOING OUR OUR PROCEDURES FOR TONIGHT'S HEARING. OUR HEARING CONSISTS OF AGENDA ITEMS THAT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING BY A ZONING HEARING MASTER. I'LL CONDUCT A HEARING ON EACH AGENDA ITEM AND WILL FILE A RECOMMENDATION WITHIN 15 BUSINESS DAYS FOLLOWING TONIGHT'S HEARING. THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THEN SENT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WHO WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. OUR HEARING TONIGHT IS INFORMAL. I'LL ASK QUESTIONS RELATED TO DIRECT TESTIMONY. I MAY CALL AND QUESTION WITNESSES AS I DEEM APPROPRIATE, AND I WILL DECIDE ALL QUESTIONS OF PROCEDURE. I'LL TAKE EVIDENCE BUT WILL EXCLUDE EVIDENCE THAT IS IRRELEVANT, IMMATERIAL, OR UNDULY REPETITIOUS. EVIDENCE MUST BE PRESENTED -- MAY BE PRESENTED IN WRITTEN FORM, AND ALL TESTIMONY MUST BE UNDER OATH. HEARSAY EVIDENCE MAY BE USED TO SUPPLEMENT OR EXPLAIN OTHER EVIDENCE, BUT SHALL NOT BE SUFFICIENT ALONE TO SUPPORT A FINDING BY ME, UNLESS IT WOULD BE ADMISSIBLE OVER OBJECTIONS IN A CIVIL ACTION. OUR ORDER OF PRESENTATION TONIGHT IS AS FOLLOWS. MS. HEINRICH OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT WILL MAKE A BRIEF INTRODUCTION FOR EACH AGENDA ITEM. WE'LL THEN GO TO THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT AND THEIR TEAM HAS A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION. NEXT UP WE'LL GO BACK TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF PLANNER WHO WAS ASSIGNED THE CASE, AND THEY WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT THE COUNTY'S FINDINGS. WE'LL THEN TURN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO HAS FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THEN WE'LL GO TO PROPONENTS. ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF AN APPLICATION. EVERYONE TOGETHER, 15 MINUTES FOR THAT TESTIMONY. THE SAME IS TRUE NEXT WHEN WE TURN TO OPPONENTS, ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST AN APPLICATION. EVERYONE COMBINED, 1 MINUTES. WE'LL CIRCLE BACK THEN TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY CHANGES OR COMMENTS BASED ON TONIGHT'S TESTIMONY, AND THEN THE APPLICANT HAS THE LAST WORD WITH FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL. REGARDING THAT TIME FOR

PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS, THE 15 MINUTE TIME FRAME, HOW THAT WILL WORK IS WHEN WE GET TO THAT SECTION, FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE IN THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, I WILL HAVE YOU RAISE YOUR HAND. WE ALSO HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE PARTICIPATED VIRTUALLY. WE WILL GET THAT TOTAL COUNT, AND WE WILL DIVIDE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SPEAK BY THE 15 MINUTES TO HAVE EVERYONE GET A FAIR CHANCE. KNOWING THAT WE CAN'T, IF THERE IS A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO DESIGNATE A SPEAKER TO USE YOUR TIME MORE EFFECTIVELY. BUT THAT'S HOW IT IS. WE HAVE A FULL AGENDA, AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO KEEP TO THOSE THTIME FRAMES BEST YOU CAN. IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK EITHER IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE, WHEN YOU START IF YOU COULD GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. WE ARE RECORDING THIS HEARING, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE YOUR INFORMATION CORRECT. WHEN YOU'RE DONE SPEAKING IF YOU'RE IN THE ROOM, IF YOU COULD SEE ALLISON AND GERMANE AT THE END OF THE DAIS. THEY HAVE A LOG ON THE TOP OF THE DAIS, AND IF YOU COULD SIGN IBIN WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, AD THE APPLICATION NUMBER TO WHICH YOU SPOKE. LET ME NOW TURN TO MS. DORMAN OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND SHE WILL PROVIDE YOU THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, WHICH GOVERN YOUR PARTICIPATION AT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING. MS. DORMAN.

HI, MARY DORMAN FROM THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING IS THE FIRST STEP OF A TWO-STEP REZONING PROCESS. THIS HEARING IS THE TIME FOR REZONING APPLICANTS AND INTERESTED PARTIES TO PRESENT EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY. ANY EVIDENCE PRESENTED TONIGHT WILL BECOME PART OF THE COMPLETE FACTUAL RECORD OF EACH APPLICATION, AND NO ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE CAN BE INTRODUCED AFTER THE CLOSING OF EACH APPLICATION. THE SECOND STEP OF THE REZONING PROCESS IS A PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WHERE THE BOARD WILL MAKE A DECISION ON EACH APPLICATION HEARD TONIGHT. TONIGHT'S APPLICATIONS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD BY THE BOARD AT ITS MARCH 10th, 2026, LAND USE MEETING UNLESS A DIFFERENT DATE IS STATED BY STAFF. WHEN CONSIDERING APPLICATIONS, THE BOARD WILL ONLY REVIEW THE RECORD AND THE RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER FOR EACH APPLICATION. THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER WILL FILE A RECOMMENDATION FOR EACH APPLICATION HEARD TONIGHT ON FEBRUARY 16th, 2026. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAS ESTABLISHED A POLICY THAT DIRECTS WHICH REZONING AND MAJOR MODIFICATION APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OF THE BOARD'S LAND USE MEETING. THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS MAY NOT BE PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. APPLICATIONS THAT PROPOSE TO ADD DENSITY OUTSIDE THE URBAN SERVICE AREA, APPLICATIONS ON ROADWAYS WITH A FAILING LEVEL OF SERVICE. APPLICATIONS THAT DO NOT HAVE CONSISTENT RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL, AND APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE HAD EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION PROVIDED TO THE RECORD BY NON-APPLICANT PARTIES OF RECORD EITHER PRIOR TO OR AT TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING. THE BOARD WILL ALLOW TESTIMONY BY ANY PARTY OF RECORD AT ITS PUBLIC MEETING TO CONSIDER THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ANY ITEM ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. TESTIMONY BY A PARTY OF RECORD SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER UNLESS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FOUND ADMISSIBLE IN IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 10.03.04D OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. A PARTY OF RECORD IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO FITS INTO AT

LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING FOUR CATEGORIES. FIRST, SOMEONE WHO'S PRESENT TONIGHT AND PRESENTS TESTIMONY OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. SECOND, SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN CERTIFIED BY THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE AS HAVING BEEN MAILED NOTICE OF TONIGHT'S HEARING. THIRD, SOMEONE WHO SUBMITTED DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO THE MASTER FILE AT LEAST TWO BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO TONIGHT'S HEARING. OR FOURTH, SOMEONE WHO SUBMITTED DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE BY PROXY AT TONIGHT'S HEARING. THE CONTENT OF ORAL ARGUMENT BEFORE THE BOARD SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE CONTENT OF THE TESTIMONY AND OTHER EVIDENCE SUBMITTED VERBALLY E OR IN WRITG TO THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER. IS THE ROLE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO ENSURE THAT ONLY INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE MET THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK BEFORE THE BOARD AND TO ENSURE THAT NO NEW EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY IS INTRODUCED OR ALLOWED AT THE BOARD'S PUBLIC MEETING. FOR THESE REASONS, PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT ALL INFORMATION YOU WISH THE BOARD TO CONSIDER AT ITS PUBLIC MEETING IS ENTERED INTO TONIGHT'S RECORD.

THANK YOU, MS. DORMAN. I APPRECIATE IT. AS I MENTIONED, ALL TESTIMONY IS UNDER -- MUST BE UNDER OATH, SO IF YOU PLAN TO SPEAK TONIGHT, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, AND I'LL SWEAR YOU IN. [SWEARING IN] THANK YOU SO MUCH. PLEASE HAVE A SEAT. ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT DONE, I WILL ADD THAT WE WILL TAKE TWO BREAKS TONIGHT IF WE GET TO THAT POINT, SOMEWHERE AROUND 8 OO O'CLOCK AND SOMEWHERE AROUND 10:00 IF YOU WANT TO PLAN YOUR TIME ACCORDINGLY. SO WITH THAT, MS. HEINRICH, WE ARE READY TO CALL THE FIRST CASE.

OUR FIRST APPLICATION IS ITEM C.1, STANDARD REZONING 25-1026. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM RSC-6 TO CG. LOGAN McCAGUE WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL PRESENT STAFF FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING. ROBERT MARTIN, REPRESENTING LEONARDO COLON. SORRY. OKAY, EVERYTHING DOESN'T WANT TOOPE NCH -- TO OPEN UP.

MR. MARTIN, DO YOU NEED SOME ASSISTANCE WITH THE PRESENTATION? NO, JUST DIDN'T WANT TO OPEN UP FOR SOME REASON. I HAVE IT OPEN NOW, BUT WE'RE READY TO GO. OKAY, PERFECT. PROCEED.

SO THE LOCATION PROPERTY IS 4512 66th STREET, TAMPA. THE ZONING IS CURRENTLY RSC-6. THEY'RE REQUESTING TO CHANGE IT OVER TO CG. THIS WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN RUNNING SOME TYPE OF PALLET BUSINESS WHERE THEY STORE THE PALLETS. PEOPLE COME AND PICK THEM UP, TAKE THEM OTHER PLACES SO THEY SELL THEM. CODE ENFORCEMENT GOT INVOLVED HAS TURNED INTO AN OUTSIDE OPEN STORAGE ISSUE. SO THE PROPERTY OWNER'S QGING THE CG ZONING TO CONTINUE THIS, THE PALLET BUSINESS. NOW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALLOWS FOR CERTAIN THINGS WHEN IT COMES TO THAT TYPE OF A PROPERTY AND THAT TYPE OF BUSINESS, SO THE REQUEST IS TO CG ZONING WHICH REQUIRES SOME TYPE OF BUFFERING TRANSITION AND DESIGN MEASUREMENTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY URBAN SERVICE AREA, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS ENCOURAGED. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE -- SERVICES ARE ADEQUATE TO SERVE GENERAL ZONING. THE PROPERTY COLLECTOR ROADWAY SUITABLE FRACOMMERCIAL ACCESS. THE PROPOSED ZONING ALLOWS NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE, LOW INTENSITY COMMERCIAL USES, CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS. THE PROPERTY'S CURRENTLY AROUND THE PROPERTY WITHIN A FEW 500 FEET. THERE IS CURRENT DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET AND THEN THERE IS ANOTHER ONE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY ON THE WEST SIDE OF 66th STREET, WHICH CURRENTLY ALLOWS 40 TO 50 SEMITRUCK TRAILERS COMING IN AND OUT OFF OF 66th STREET. SO CURRENTLY THE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER FOR TAMPA IS AVAILABLE. THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THE MIX OF THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CG IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROCESS AMOUNT OF WETLANDS THERE ARE NO

WETLANDS AVAILABLE. THE CURRENT PROPERTY IS 1.54 ACRES. SO THE REQUEST TODAY IS WE HAD INITIAL APPROVAL FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES THAT THERE WERE NO ISSUES, BUT THEN IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT THEY WANTED US TO APPLY FOR A CLC COMMERCIAL LOCATION CRITERIA WAIVER. I SUBMITTED A DOCUMENT TO THE LADY INVOLVED, AND THEN IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE OUTSIDE OPEN STORAGE WASN'T ALLOWED, AND THE REQUEST WAS TO DO THE CG ZONING IN ORDER FOR US TO BUILD A COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO ELIMINATE THE CG OR THE OUTSIDE OPEN STORAGE. OKAY. DOES THAT COMPLETE YOUR PRESENTATION? PRETTY MUCH. IT SUMS IT UP IN A NUT SHELL, YES.

ALL RIGHT, I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. YOU, I SAW IN MY REVIEW OF THE FILE THAT YOU ORIGINALLY APPLIED FOR CI AND CHANGED IT TO CG. WHAT'S THE REASON FOR THAT. YEAH, THAT WAS A MISTAKE. YOU KNOW, PALLETS IS NOT A COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE BUSINESS. OKAY. AND THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD THOUGHT THAT SOMEBODY TOLD HIM ALONG THE WAY BECAUSE IT WAS TOTE PROPERTIES IN THERE THAT HAD PD ZONING SO HE THOUGHT HIS IDEAL ZONING WOULD BE CI. AFTER A FEW MONTHS OF GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH HIM AND DISCUSSING THE CG ZONING WOULD BE THE BETTER ALTERNATIVE, THAT'S WHEN WE CHANGED IT.

I SEE. AND I THINK YOU JUST ANSWERED MY QUESTION ON MY SECOND ISSUE, AND THAT WAS WHY THE REQUEST FOR CG IF THEY DON'T ALLOW OPEN STORAGE AND IT'S A PALLET BUSINESS. SO YOUR PLAN IS TO COMPLETELY ENCLOSE ALL OF THE PALLETS? RIGHT. TO ELIMINATE OUTSIDE OPEN STORAGE YOU NEED THREE WALLS AND SO IN ORDER FOR HIM TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT LARGE, IT HAS TO BE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING OR COMMERCIAL ZONING BECAUSE RSC-6 WON'T ALLOW US TO DO THAT. YEAH, I DID REVIEW THE AERIAL PHOTOS AND IT'S QUITE A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT. RIGHT, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS ELIMINATE HALF OF THAT AMOUNT IN ORDER TO BUILD A BUILDING. AND HE'S GOING TO START DOING MANUFACTURING OF PALLETS ON ANOTHER LOCATION SOMEWHERE ELSE. TO HELP ELIMINATE TYPE OF TRAFFIC AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT WOULD COME TO THAT PROPERTY.

ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE WE DO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING THAT SOMEBODY'S DISPUTING IT. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS AN ONGOING BATTLE BETWEEN HIM AND A NEIGHBOR. AND THAT'S HOW CODE ENFORCEMENT GOT INVOLVED TO BEGIN WITH. I SEE. AND YOU ARE AWARE THAT ON THE WEST SIDE OF 66th, IT'S INDUSTRIAL AND MANUFACTURED ZONING UNLIKE THE EAST SIDE. CORRECT, AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, EVERYTHING ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIM DOESN'T FRONT 66th STREET. IT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE CUL-DE-SAC IN THE BACK SIDE THAT WAS PD TO BE SOME TYPE OF A SUBDIVISION. OKAY. THOSE ARE MY ONLY QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IF YOU COULD PENALIZE SIGN IPWITH THE -- PLEASE SIGN IN WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

DEVELOPMENT SERV SERVICES.

GOOD EVENING, LOGAN McCAKE DEVELOPMENT -- McCAGUE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. REQUEST TO REZONE TO MOBILE HOME OVERLAY. -- OPEN STORAGE. THE PROPOSED ZONING IF APPROVED WOULD NOT ALLOW OPEN STORAGE. SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE AREA DEVELOPED WITH RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL USES, SINGLE-FAMILY IS PRESENT TO THE IMMEDIATE EAST OF THE SITE. WHICH POSES COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS. AND A LACK OF TRANSITION BETWEEN THE MORE INTENSE USES FOUND TO THE WEST UNDER THE PROPOSAL THE FULL RANGE OF CG COMMERCIAL GENERAL USES WOULD BE PERMITTED WITH NO ADDITIONAL COMPATIBILITY MEASURES OR, WITH NO ADDITIONAL COMPATIBILITY MEASURES SUCH AS INCREASED SETBACKS, BUFFERING BG AND SCREENING. IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE, THE SITE FAILS TO MEET REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COMMERCIAL LOCATIONAL CRITERIA AS OUTLINED BY THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE APPLICANT DID NOT PROVIDE A CLC WAIVER. THEREFORE, BASED ON THE ABOVE CONSIDERATIONS, STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST NONSUPPORTABLE.

THANK YOU SO MUCHMENT PLANNING COMMISSION?

ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE SUBJECT SITE IS IN THE RESIDENTIAL 6 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY. IT IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PALM RIVER PROGRESS VILLAGE COMMUNITY PLAN. THE PROPOSED REZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY CONVENTIONAL 6 TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL TO ALLOW THE SALES OF PALLETS WOULD INTRODUCE A USE THAT IS OPERATIONALLY INTENSIVE AND VISUALLY IMPACTFUL IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. DESPITE THE PRESENCE OF MORE INTENSE USES IN THE BROADER AREA, THE PROPOSED REZONING DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE INTENT OF THE FUTURE LAND USE SECTION OBJECTIVE 1.1, WHICH EMPHASIZES LAND USE COMPATIBILITY, APPROPRIATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN DIFFERENT INTENSITIES, AND A PROTECTION OF ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL AREAS FROM ENCROACHMENT BY COMPATIBLE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL USES -- I'M SOARE, ACTIVITIES AS WELL AL AS FUTURE LAND USE OBJECTIVE 4.4 REGARDING NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION. OPEN STORAGE REPRESENTS A LEVEL OF INTENSITY AND FUNCTIONAL CHARACTER THAT EXCEEDS WHAT IS ENVISIONED FOR THE RES-6 DESIGNATION AND IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE PURCHASE OF MAINTAINING A -- PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. THE SUBJECT SITE ALSO DOES NOT MEET COMMERCIAL LOCATIONAL CRITERIA REQUIRED BY OBJECTIVE 4.7 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE NEAREST QUALIFYING INTERSECTION, HARTFORD STREET AND 66TH STREET SOUTH IS APPROXIMATELY 1900 FEET FROM THE SUBJECT SITE WHICH EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM DENSITY, I'M SORRY, DISTANCE ALLOWED. IT IS ALSO INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROGRESS VILLAGE -- PALM RIVER PROGRESS VILLAGE COMMUNITY PLANS INTENT TO GUIDE GROWTH IN A MANNER THAT IS CONTEXT SENSITIVE AND COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. BASED UPON THE ABOVE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE FOLLOWING GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FIND THE PROPOSED REZONING INCONSISTENT WITH THE UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

MS. MEYERS, JUST ONE -- MYERS, JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION. THE PROPERTY YOU STATED DOESN'T MEET COMMERCIAL LOCATIONAL CRITEIA. YES. THEY DID SUBMIT A WAIVER, THE APPLICANT? I BELIEVE THEY DID. SORRY, NO, A WAIVER WAS NOT SUBMITTED. NOT SUBMITTED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THAT WAS ALL. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL TURN TO ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT. ANYONE IN FAVOR THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. SEEING NO ONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT, WELL, MR. SHIFT COMES FORWARD, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NO ONE, GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU, MADAM HEARING MASTER. MY NAME IS GORDON SCHIFF, GORDON J. SCHIFF, PA, 4155 WEST CYPRESS STREET, TAMPA, FLORIDA. I REPRESENT A. SCOTT AND REBECCA S. HENDRY WHO OWN THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. WE SUBMITTED DETAILED WRITTEN COMMENTS AND OBJECTIONS THAT ARE IN THE RECORD AND I'LL, I HAVE AN EXTRA COPY TO GO INTO THE RECORD TONIGHT, BUT THEY ALREADY WERE SUBMITTED JANUARY 12th, AND IT INQLIEWDED TWO EXISTING ORDERS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT WERE REFERENCED ALSO I THINK IN THE STAFF REPORT. SO THERE'S CODE ISSUES AS WELL AS THE QUESTION OF NOT HAVING ZONING. THE PROPOSED ZONING IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. YOU, AND I WET INTO DETAIL IN MY LETTER, BUT THE STAFF HAS ALSO FOUND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE ZONING IS ALSO NOT APPROPRIATE IN THIS AREA THAT IS WHAT THE COUNTY STAFF HAS FOUND, AND IT'S INCOMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES. OUR LETTER AND I'M SUMMARIZING WHAT IN OUR -- WHAT'S IN OUR LETTER BUT THERE IS A SUBSTANDARD ROADWAY SET FORTH IN THE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION'S COMMENTS SHEETS SO IT'S A SUBSTANDARD ROADWAY. IT DOESN'T HAVE WATER, WASTEWATER, AND THERE IS NO CONNECTION AT THE PROPERTY LINE. IT'S QUITE AWAYS AWAY. THAT'S IN THE WATER RESOURCES REPORT. IT'S CLEAR THAT CG IS TOO INTENSIVE FOR THIS SITE. IT'S TOO SMALL TO DO THIS TYPE OF USE TO BEGIN WITH. IT HAS ISSUES ON COMMERCIAL ACCESS, PARKING, LOADING, CIRCULATION, STORMWATER, BUFFERING, AND SCREENING, AND AS I SAID, THE STAFF REPORT FINDS IT'S NOT SUPPORTABLE. SO FINALLY, JUST ONE OTHER POINT. THERE IS NO BASIS TO CLAIM ANY VESTED OR EQUITABLE STOPPLE OR VESTED LEGAL RIGHTS. THIS IS JUST A USE THAT WAS NOT PERMITTED THAT SOMEBODY STARTED

DOING. THAT DOESN'T, YOU DO NOT GET ANY VESTED RIGHTS FOR THAT. SO THAT'S NOT A VALID ARGUMENT. SO WITH THAT, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION, AND I THINK MR. HENDRY WANTS TO SAY A FEW WORDS. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME'S SCOTT HENDRY. MY WIFE AND I OWN THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S UP FOR REZONING. IT REALLY JUST DOES NOT FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A PRETTY QUIET PLACE, AND WE'VE BEEN WATCHING WHAT'S EVOLVED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS ON THE PROPERTY. IT JUST GETS -- THERE IS MORE AND MORE ALL THE TIME. IT'S VERY UNSIGHTLY. THERE'S BEEN NUMEROUS CODE VIOLATIONS REPORTED. I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM HAVE REALLY, THEY MAY HAVE SOLVED A FEW OF THEM, BUT MOST OF THEM REMAIN OPEN, AND WE STRONGLY OPPOSE WHAT'S GOING ON.

ALL RIGHT, SIR. THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN. IF YOU COULD PLEASE SIGN IN AS WELL. ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION BEFORE WE MOVE ON? SEEING NO ONE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES? MS. HEINRICH, ANYTHING ELSE? NOTHING FURTHER. ALL RIGHT. THEN THE APPLICANT HAS THE LAST WORD. MR. MARTIN, YOU CAN COME FORWARD IF YOU WOULD LIKE, OR YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT.

ROBERT MARTIN. TO GO BACK TO THE WAIVER, AS SOON AS I RECEIVED THE EMAIL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SHE ASKED FOR A CLC. THE COMMERCIAL LOCATION CRITERIA, AND I SENT HER THAT DOCUMENT. I NEVER RECEIVED ANYTHING ELSE AFTER THAT OTHER THAN AN EMAIL FROM THEM TELLING ME THAT OUTSIDE OPEN STORAGE WAS NOT ALLOWED. SO WHERE WAS THIS WAIVER SUPPOSED TO COME FROM? IT'S WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION? MS. MYERS IF YOU COULD CHECK REAL QUICK. I APOLOGIZE I DO SEE THE WAIVER. IT WAS SUBMITTED BACK IN OCTOBER OPOCTOBER 30th. HOWEVER, WE DO ASK THAT IT IS DENIED BY THE BOARD. THANK YOU. SO THAT, THEY DID RECEIVE YOUR APPLICATION. OR YOUR REQUEST.

THANK YOU. AND THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES ARE GENERATED BY THE NEIGHBOR OF THE SOUTH. LEONARDO CAN LON IS JUST NOT ELECTED TO REPORT THEM FOR THEIR MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS. AND TO KIND OF SUM IT UP, I WAS THE ORIGINAL CODE ENFORCEMENT ORVES WHO CITE POLICE DEPARTMENT COLON FOR THE OUTSIDE OPEN STORAGE ORIGINALLY. SO I'M NO LONGER WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT. THAT'S WHY I'M IN THE PROCESS OF HELPING HIM TO GET THIS REZONED IN ORDER TO HAVE THE CG SO HE CAN CONTINUE WHAT HE'S DOING WHICH HE HAS BEEN DOING FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS. SO THIS REZONING, THIS NOT NECESSARILY IT'S A HARDSHIP FOR HIM DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT'S AN ONGOING NEIGHBORHOOD DISPUTE. HOW LONG HAS HE BEEN IN OPPOSITION?

OVER FIVE YEARS. NOW, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, HE HAD ANOTHER BUSINESS THAT HE WAS RUNNING THERE AS WELL. THE MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS KEEP COMING IN. BEFORE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO ANONYMOUS BUT NOW THEY HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED OF WHO'S CALLING IN THE VIOLATION, SO HE'S DOING WHAT HE CAN TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY, TRY TO MAINTAIN A DECENT BUSINESS SUPPORT HIS FAMILY. ALL RIGHT. IS THAT -- NOW ORIGINALLY I DID GET AN EMAIL FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SAYING THEY HAD NO OBJECOBJECTIONS TO THIS CG. LAST WEEK IS WHEN I RECEIVED THE EMAIL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE FIRST TIME ABOUT THE WAIVER.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. I APPRECIATE IT. THEN WITH THAT WE'LL CLOSE REZONING 25-1026 AND GO TO THE NEXT CASE. I'M SORRY, MS. FINCH. I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION BECAUSE I WAS SPEAKING WITH SOMEBODY. THERE WAS A WAIVER REQUEST TO THE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA? YES. YES, IT WAS SUBMITTED OCTOBE. THAT'S OKAY. WE'LL CALL THE NEXT CASE.

LET'S SEE. THE NEXT APPLICATION IS ITEM C.2, STANDARD REZONING 25-1350. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM ASC-1 TO BPO-R RESTRICTED. MICHELLE MONTALBANO WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL PRESENT STAFF FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, HEARING OFFICER. TODD PRESSMAN, 202ND AVENUE 200E SOUTH, NUMBER 451 IN ST. PETERSBURG. I DO HAVE A POWERPOINT IF THAT'S UP FOR YOU. OKAY.

THIS IS RZ STANDARD 25-1350. WE'RE LOCATED IN THE BRANDON AREA. ISSUE IS INDICATED AS ASC-1 TO BPO FOR 2.5 ACRES. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SUPPORT, AND WE HAVE NEIGHBOR SUPPORT. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS THAT ARE INDICATED IN THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH IS INCLUDING A 30-FOOT B BUFFER ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS ENHANCED FROM A 20-FOOT B. ALSO RESTRICTING THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO 15,000 SQUARE FEET. MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS ONE STORY OR 23 FEET. WITH ARCHITECTURAL EMBELLISHMENTS, AND A SET OF APPEARANCE CONDITIONS. THAT'S A LONG LIST OF THEM. WHICH GO FROM A, B, C, WHICH INCLUDE JUST A WIDE RANGE OF MATERIALS AND STANDARDS THAT REALLY TAKE A LOT OF CONTROL OVER HOW THE STRUCTURE WILL LOOK. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES KNOWS THAT THESE RESTRICTIONS ALSO PROVIDE FOR SCALE AND DESIGN THAT WOULD BE COMPARABLE TO THE OTHER NONSINGLE-FAMILY INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE VICINITY OF THE PARCEL THAT ALSO FRONT TO LITHIA PINECREST ROAD. AS INDICATED, WE WOULD DO THE 30-FOOT B ALONG THE NORTH. AND THE STAFF REPORT ALSO NOTES THAT LITHIA PINECREST IS DESIGNATED FOR FOUR-LANE ENHANCEMENT PER THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CORRIDOR PRESERVATION PLAN. THIS IS A WIDER LOCATIONAL SHOWING YOU WHERE THE LOCATION IS ON LITHIA PINECREST SOUTH OF EAST LUMSDEN. THIS IS AS THE PROPERTY APPRAISER HAS IT ON LITHIA PINECREST. ZONING IS ASC-1. YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S BEEN LOT OF ACTIVITY TO THE NORTH WITH BPOs AND PDs, LOOKING CLOSER, THAT INCLUDE A CAR WASH, OFFICE RESIDENTIAL, AND OTHER

SIMILAR USES AS YOU CAN SEE. THIS WOULD BE A .20 FAR WHICH IS VERY LOW IN THE COMP PLAN WHICH WILL RESTRICT THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT. RATHER THAN LOOKING AT ZONING MAPS AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP, I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT HERE AS WELL WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOUND WERE THE ACTUAL USES IN THE AREA AND HOW THE AREA HAS CHANGED ALREADY. WHICH INCLUDES A VACANT HOME TO THE NORTH, AND WE TRIED REPEATEDLY TO TOUCH BASE WITH THEM. THERE'S NO ONE WAS APPARENTLY HOME. IT APPEARS THE HOME IS VACANT. CHURCH ACROSS THE STREET, A TEMPLE, AND A VERY LARGE CHILDREN'S CENTER, KIDS PLACE. ALSO TO THE SOUTH IS A CABINET COMPANY. AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT, THEY DO RECOGNIZE SOME OF THIS NOTING TO THE EAST OF THE SITE THERE ARE PUBLIC QUASI-PUBLIC USES, INCLUDING THE CHURCH, MULTIFAMILY USE OPERATING AS A CHILDREN'S SHELTER, FURTHER NORTH ACROSS LITHIA PINECREST THERE IS ADDITIONAL PUBLIC QUASI-SERVICE, INCLUDING USE OF ANOTHER CHURCH. SO THIS IS ABUTTING SOUTH WHICH APPARENTLY IS A CABINET COMPANY TO SOME DEGREE OR SOME REGARD. AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET YOU CAN SEE THE LINEUP OF THE INSTITUTIONAL USES AS HERE AND HERE. AND THE KIDS PLACE IS A BIG, THEY'RE DOING GREAT WORK. IT'S NAMED AFTER DOTTIE BURGER McKENNAN A FORMER COMMISSIONER WHO WORKED A LOT IN THIS AREA. IT'S QUITE A FACILITY. THEY DO GREAT WORK, AND IT'S QUITE A LARGE FACILITY. THEY MAINTAIN LOT OF ACTIVITY AND ARE REALLY DOING A LOT OF GREAT WORK. -- CHILDREN PROVIDING A SAFE, LOVING, AND NURCHERLING HOME FOR FOSTER CHILDREN WHICH IS THEIR MISSION STATEMENT. YOU CAN SEE THE CAMPUS LOCATED OR INDICATED HERE. LITHIA PINECREST ITSELF CARRIES OVER 20,000 VEHICLE AS DAY. AND REGARDLESS OF SUPPORT AND REACHING OUT, THE NEIGHBORS THAT WE COULD GET TO INDICATE HERE TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE WEST AND THOSE LETTERS OF SUPPORT SIGNATURES ARE PART OF THE RECORD. I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.

THEY NOTE THEIR RECOMMENDATION THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE GARDEN ESTATES CHARACTER DISTRICT, WHICH CONSISTS PREDOMINANTLY OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, SO YOU CAN SEE ALL THAT GREEN AREA IS THE GARDEN ESTATES DISTRICT. AND YOU CAN SEE LUMSDEN, IT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHERE THE SITE IS LOCATED, WHICH IS AT THE VERY NORTH OF THIS DISTRICT. AND I CHARTED IT THERE FOR YOU. SO OUR CONTENTION IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WITH RESPECT TO PLANNING COMMISSION, WE'RE LOOKING AT THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE GATEWAY COMMUNITY PLAN SPECIFICALLY THE GARDEN DISTRICT, INDICATED HERE, WHICH IS A VERY PREDOMINANT ALL TO THE SOUTH -- PRIMARILY PROBABLY 95% TO THE SOUTH WHEREAS I'VE SHOWN YOU THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES TO THE IMMEDIATE NORTH OF THE SITE. SO I THINK OUR POSITIONS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN TERMS OF HOW THEY'RE LOOKING AT IT AND WE'RE LOOKING AT IT. WE DO HAVE A LOCATION WAIVER, WE'RE SUPPORTIVE BUT I'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED IT AND CHANGED, MORPHING AREA, THAT THE ABUTTABUTTING ADJACENT PROPERTIE COMPATIBLE BY USE OR DOCUMENTED SUPPORT AND WE DON'T FEEL THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S PRESENTATION INTO THE GARDEN AREA APPLIES WELL TO THAT SECTION, SO WE SEE THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY AGAIN WITH RESPECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY WOULD INTRODUCE A USE THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PATTERN THAT GARDEN ESTATES DISTRICT. HOWEVER, STAFF FINDS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE SURROUNDING AREA REMAINS PRE2K5U78INANTLY RESIDENTIAL IN NAICHTURE WE HAVE SHOWN YOU ISN'T THE CASE. WE LOOK AT THAT DIFFERENTLY AS I SHOWED YOU THE PICTURES AND THE USES AND THE GARDEN ESTATE DISTRICT. SO WITH THAT WE APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION AND ARE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

I DO, A COUPLE. WHAT KIND OF OFFICE ARE YOU PROPOSING? I SAW A MAXIMUM OF 15,000 SQUARE FEET. UNDER THE ZONING, I THINK IT BEST ANSWER IS UNDER BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL. THERE IS NO BUSINESS CHOSEN. IT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE UNDER BPO CATEGORY. OKAY. AND WHAT WOULD BE THE P PROPOSED SIGNAGE FOR THE C PROPERTY? IT WOULD MEET CODE, WHATEVER CODE WOULD PERMIT. ALL RIGHT. I SEE YOU PROPOSE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF RESTRICTIONS THAT LIMIT IT TO A RESIDENTIAL APPEARANCE. SO WOULD THAT NOT THEN FOLLOW THAT YOU WOULD WANT SOME SORT OF SMALLER SCALE RESIDENTIAL SIGNAGE TO GO ALONG WITH THAT?

I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE CONDUCIVE. AND THE REASON YOU SEE THOSE CONDITIONS, BECAUSE WE'VE TRIED TO WORK WITH THE ZONING DEPARTMENT WHO FIRST HAD SOME RESISTANCE TO IT, SO THE APPLICANT THANKFULLY WAS VERY HAPPY TO WORK WITH THE STAFF AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO RESTRICT SIGNAGE TO I THINK THERE IS AN OR STANDARD THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE, BUT WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ZONING HEARING MASTER OR THE ZONING STAFF IN THAT DIRECTION. ALL RIGHT, AND LAST QUESTION, THE SURROUNDING USES I UNDERSTAND THE INSTITUTIONAL USES THAT YOU SHOWED AND AGREE WITH THAT. BUT THE CABINET COMPANY ON A PROPERTY ZONED ASC-1. DO YOU HAVE ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT THAT'S A LEGAL USE?

I DO NOT. THAT WAS AN OBSERVATION THAT CLEARLY THERE IS QUITE AN ORGANIZATION RUNNING THERE, SO I COULD SEE FROM EXTERIOR BECAUSE IT'S THE ABUSING USE, AND I THINK -- ABUTTING USE AND I THINK IT'S A CONSIDERATION THAT WE WOULD ASK YOU TO ENTERTAIN THAT DEMONSTRATES HOW THAT AREA IS MORPHING, WHETHER IT'S A PERMISSIBLE USEO USE OR NOT. BUT IT IS NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE A PERMISSIBLE USE ON NAT ZONING. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, MICHELLE MONTALBANO, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM ASC-1 TO BPO WITH RESTRICTIONS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN BRANDON WITH RESIDENTIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE VICINITY. IN RESPONSE TO THE STAFF'S COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS WITH THE CAN WS, GIVEN THE RESIDENTIAL USES SURROUNDING TH PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT HAS OFFERED MULTIPLE RESTRICTIONS ON THE REZONING. THE PROPOSED RESTRICTIONS INCLUDE INCREASED BUFFERING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS, LIMITING THE TOTAL SQUARE YEAR TO -- AND A SET OF DESIGN REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE RESIDENTIAL APPEARANCE. THESE RESTRICTIONS PROVIDE FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT WITH A SCALE AND DESIGN THAT WOULD BE COMPARABLE TO THE OTHER NONSINGLE-FAMILY INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE VICINITY OF THE PARCEL THAT ALSO FRONT ONTO LITHIA PINECREST ROAD. THEREFORE, WE FIND THE REQUEST SUPPORTABLE SUBJECT TO THE PROPOSED RESTRICTIONS.

ALL RIGHTX THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. PLANNING COMMISSION. > ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY I MISSPOKE ON THE REZONING 25-1026. THE CLC WAIVER WAS ACTUALLY SUBMITTED ON JANUARY 22nd. THANK YOU.

REGARDING 25-1350, THE SUBJECT SITE IS IN THE RESIDENTIAL 4 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY. IT IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE BRANDON COMMUNITY PLAN. GIVEN THE SITE'S SURROUNDED -- GIVEN THE SITE IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THE INTRODUCTION OF THE BPO ZONING DISTRICT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA. ADDITIONALLY, AS THIS IS A STANDARD REZONING REQUEST, A SITE PLAN DEMONSTRATING POTENTIAL BUFFERS AND SCREENING TO AID IN THE TRANSITION OF USES IS NOT PROVIDED OR REQUIRED AT THIS STAGE,. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH MITIGATION FEATURES BETWEEN THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AND THE PROPOSED OFFICE USE, THIS REQUEST CONFLICTS WITH THE INTENT OF FUTURE LAND USE SECTION OBJECTIVE 1.1 AND OBJECTIVE 4.4 TO ENSURE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH AND MAINTAINS THE CHARACTER OF EXISTING DEVELOPMENT. THE SUBJECT SITE ALSO DOES NOT MEET COMMERCIAL LOCATIONAL CRITERIA AS ESTABLISHED BY OBJECTIVE 4.7 ANDITHS ASSOCIATED POLICIES -- AND ITS ASSOCIATED POLICIES. THE CLOSEST QUALIFYING INTERSECTION IS APPROXIMATELY 2400 FEET AWAY FROM THE SUBJECT SITE, AT LITHIA PINECREST CORRODE AND BELL SHOALS ROAD -- ROAD AND BELL SHOALS ROAD. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED WAIVER REQUEST DETAILING THE SITE PROPOSED FOR BPO IS COMPATIBLE BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A DRASTIC CHANGE OF USES ALONG THE SEGMENT OF LITHIA PINECREST ROAD AWAY FROM A RESIDENTIAL USES. HOWEVER, STAFF FINDS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD -- I'M SORRY, SURROUNDING AREA REMAINS PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL IN NATURE. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO BPO WOULD INTRODUCE A USE THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PATTERN OF THE GARDEN ESTATES CHARACTER DISTRICT. BASED UPON THOSE ABOVE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE FOLLOWING OBJECTIVE POLICIES, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED STANDARD REZONING INCONSISTENT WITH THE UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? ANYONE IN FAVOR? SEEING NO ONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST? NO ONE. ALL RIGHT. MS. HEINRICH, ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? THE ONLY THINK I WOULD ADD IS THAT IF YOU DID WANT TO LOOK AT DOING OR PROPOSING A RESTRICTION ON SIGNAGE, IT LOOKS LIKE IN THOSE OR ZONING DISTRICTS THAT IT'S LIMITED THAT IT HAS TO BE UNLIGHTED. AND THE SIZE IS LIMITED TO SIX SQUARE FEET IN SIZE, AND THEN I THINK THE SETBACKS AND THE HEIGHTS JUST FOLLOW THE REGULAR SIGN CODE.

AND BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THAT, IS THERE A, ANY, DO YOU OR STAFF HAVE ANY OPINION ABOUT THAT? ABOUT RESTRICTING THE SIGNAGE. I KNOW IT WASN'T PROPOSED AS A PAT OF THIS TO THIS POINT. NO CONCERNS WITH THAT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND I DON'T KNOW IF MR. PRESSMAN'S GOING TO ADDRESS IT, BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION WHAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT FOR THAT SIGNAGE. ALL RIGHT, PERFECT. MR. PRESSMAN, WE WILL GO BACK TO YOU FOR FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.

THANK YOU, HEARING OFFICER. I DID WANT TO NOTE THAT WE HAD NOTICED 29 PERSONS TWICE, AND THREE HOAs. WHEN I CHECKED THE RECORD, IT TE WERE NO LETTERS OR E-MAILS IN OPPOSITION, AND NO ONE IS HERE THIS EVENING. THE OR STANDARDS ARE PRETTY RESTRICTIVE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN BE ACCEPTABLE TO THOSE. I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT ACROSM ONE PHOTO ON LITHIA PINECREST, THERE'S TYPICAL SIGNAGE LINED UP FOR THE INSTITUTIONALS, AND I THINK THAT TYPE OF SIGNAGE WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE, WHATEVER IS PERMISSIBLE FOR AN INSTITUTIONAL USE I THINK WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE HERE.

ALL RIGHT, DOES THAT CLIEWNDE YOUR REBUTTAL TESTIMONY? 72 YES. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL GO ONTO OUR NEXT CASE. OUR NEXT APPLICATION IS C.3, REZONING STANDARD 26-0128. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM RSC-6 TO RSC-6 MH MOBILE HOME OVERLAY. THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY SIERRA JAMES AND IN HER ABSENCE TONIGHT I WILL BE PROVIDING HER STAFF FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, OFFICER. MY NAME IS JUAN PIZANO SANCHEZ, AND MY PROPOSAL IS TO REZONE FROM RSC-6 TO RSC-6 HM. THE REASON IS BECAUSE I WANT TO LAY TWO MOBILE HOMES IN THERE. RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY FOR HOUSES. AND I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE ONE PIECE TO MY DAUGHTER AND ONE TO MY SON SO THEY CAN LIVE THERE BECAUSE RIGHT NOWX YOU KNOW, LIFE IS EXPENSIVE TO BUILD A HOUSE, SO IT WILL BE CHEAPER FOR THEM TO GET A MOBILE HOME AND PLACE IT THERE. AND I THINK WITH THIS ACTION I WON'T BE AFFECTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S MOBILE HOMES AROUND THE PLACE, SO THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY.

ALL RIGHT AND I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN WITH THE CLERK. PRLAPPRECIATE IT. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. MICHELLE HEINRICH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. STAFF REVIEWED REZONING APPLICATION REQUESTING A CHANGE FROM RSC-6 TO RSC-6 MH, WHICH WOULD EXPAND THE PERMITTED HOUSING TYPES TO INCLUDE MOBILE HOMES. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE WIMAUMA COMMUNITY AND WITHIN THE RES-6 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY. THE AREA FEATURES BOTH RSC-6 AND RSC-6 MH ZONING ALREADY, AND STAFF DOES NOT HAVE ANY COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS. NO OBJECTIONS FROM REVIEWING AGENCIES WERE RECEIVED, AND STAFF HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE REQUEST. I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. NONE AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. PLANNING COMMISSION.

ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMI- COMMISSION STAFF. THE SUBJECT SITE IS IN THE RESIDENTIAL 6 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY. IT IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE SOUTHSHORE AREA-WIDE SYSTEMS PLAN AND THE WIMAUMA VILLAGE COMMUNITY PLAN. GOAL 1 OF THE CULTURAL HISTORIC OBJECTIVE OF THE SOUTHSHORE AREA-WIDE SYSTEMS PLAN SEEKS TO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THAT IS CLOSER AND WELL PLANNED TO PRESERVE THE AREA'S ENVIRONMENT, CULTURAL IDENTITY, AND VIABILITY. GOAL 5 OF THE WIMAUMA VILLAGE COMMUNITY PLAN SEEKS TO ENCOURAGE HOUSING TO ACCOMMODATE A DIVERSE POPULATION AND RANGE OF INCOME LEVELS. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND CONSISTENT WITH FUTURE LAND USE SECTION OBJECTIVE 1.1 AND POLICY 3.1.3 AS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EXISTS ON ALL SIDES OF THE SITE. WITH 0.84 ACRES, THE SUBJECT SITE CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR A MAXIMUM OF FIVE DWELLING UNITS. THE PROPOSED REZONING TO INCLUDE A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE USES ALLOWED UNDER THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL 6 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY, AND THE REQUEST IS THEREFORE CONSISTENT WITH GOAL 1, I'M SORRY, GOAL 2 AND OBJECTIVE 2.1. THE PROPOSAL ALSO SATISFIES THE INTENT OF OBJECTIVE 4.1, 4.4, AND PALE OS4.4 -- POLICY 4.4.1 WHICH REQUIRE -- COMPATIBLE -- ADDITIONALLY HOUSING POLICY 1.2.9 STATES THAT MANUFACTURED HOUSING AND MOBILE HOMES 1458 BE ACKNOWLEDGED AS VIABLE MEANS TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN THE COUNTY. BASED UPON THOSE ABOVE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE FOLLOWING GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FIND THE PROPOSAL CONSISTENT WITH THE UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? ANYONE IN FAVOR? SEEING NO ONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST? NO ONE. MS. HEINRICH, ANYTHING ELSE? NO, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. SIR, YOU HAVE THE LAST WORD, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE WILL CLOSE 26-0128 AND GO TO THE NEXT CASE. C.4, STANDARD REZONING 26-0163. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM RSC-6 TO RSC-6 MH. LOGAN McCAGUE WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL PROVIDE STAFF FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT IS. ONLINE.

HELLO, GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS KELLI CONTE. -- WE ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY. IT IS CURRENTLY RSC-6 AND WE WOULD LIKE TO REZONE IT TO RSC-6 WITH A MH OVERLAY. THERE ARE SEVERAL MOBILE HOMES CURRENTLY INSTALLED ON RAILROAD STREET AS WELL AS OTHER STREETS IN THE NEARBY NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS WILL PROVIDE NECESSARY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE FAMILY. ALL RIGHT. DOES THAT COMPLETE YOUR PRESENTATION? YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES?

GOOD EVENING. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES -- LOGAN McCAGUE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. APPLICATION 26-0163. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM RSC-6 TO AN RSC-6 WITH MOBILE HOME OVERLAY. WHILE THOUGHT DIRECTLY ADJACENT -- NOT DIRECTLY ADJACENT THERE ARE SEVERAL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO CONSISTING OF RSC-6 MOBILE HOME ZONING DESIGNATION, INCLUDING SOME ZONINGS THAT HAVE BEEN APPLIED FOR AND GRANTED W IN THE LAST FEW YEARS. AS SUCH, IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND AS THE REZONING DOES NAT SEEK TO CHANGE THE DENSITY BUT ONLY OOTD TO THE PERMITTED BUILDING TYPES, THERE IS NO ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THANK YOU SO MUCH. PLANNING COMMISSION?

DISMOO ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE RESIDENTIAL 6 FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. IT IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE WIMAUMA VILLAGE COMMUNITY PLAN. THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THIS AREA CONSISTS OF MAINLY RESIDENTIAL USES WITH SINGLE-FAMILY USES BEING IN THE PREDOMINANT USE TO THE NORTH, EAST, AND WEST OF THE SITE. THERE ARE MULTIPLE AREAS SURROUNDING THE SITE THAT HAVE A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY, AND THERE IS AN EXISTING MOBILE HOME PARK APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE. A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY WITHIN THE PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH EXISTING MOBILE HOME PARK IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING AREA AND THEREFORE MEET THE INTENT OF OBJECTIVE 1.1 AND 3.1 AND POLICY 3.1.3 AS WELL AS OBJECTIVE 1.4 REGARDING NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION. WITH A 0.52 ACRES THE SUBJECT SITE CAN CONSIDER A MAXIMUM OF THREE DWELLING UNITS. GOAL 5 OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN SEEKS TO ENCOURAGE HOUSING TO ACCOMMODATE A DIVERSE POPULATION AND RANGE OF INCOME LEVELS. ADDITIONALLY HOUSING POLICY 1.2.9 STATE THAT MANUFACTURED HOUSING AND MOBILE HOMES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED AS VIABLE MEANS TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN THE COUNTY. BASED UPON THOSE CONSIDERATIONS, AND FOLLOWING GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FIND THE PROPOSED REZONING CONSISTENT WITH THE UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? ANYONE IN FAVOR? SEEING NO ONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION? NO. MS. HEINRICH. NOTHING FURTHER. ALL RIGHT. MS. CONTE, YOU HAVE THE LAST WORD IF YOU WOULD LIKE IT? NO, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THEN WE WILL CLOSE REZONING 26-0163. AND GO AT NO TIME NEXT CASE. ITEM DONE, PD25-0809. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE PROPERTY TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. CHRIS GRANDLIENARD WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL PROVIDE STAFF FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION.

ALL RIGHT, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? GOOD EVENING, HEARING OFFICER. TODD PRESSMAN, 200 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH. NUMBER 451 ST. PETERSBURG, I'M HERE WITH MI MICHAEL SANDERS WHS THE ENGINEER ON THE PROJECT, AND I HAVE A POWERPOINT FOR YOU. IF THAT'S UP FOR YOU. YES. OKAY. ABSOLUTELY.

THIS IS PD25-0809 LOCATED IN EAST LAKE ORIENT PARK AREA. YOU CAN SEE IT'S LOCATED BETWEEN THE NEXUS OF I-4 AND I-75. SPECIFICALLY BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER IS 10.15 ACRES. ABUTTING OR ADJACENT TO THE BYPASS CANAL. PLANNING COMMISSION IS CONSISTENT, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS APPROVABLE, TRANSPORTATION NO OBJECTION WITH SOME CONDITIONS. THE ISSUE IS A PD TO AS.4 TO A UNIFIED PD FOR A FIXED UNIT PARK MOBILE PARK TRAILER, WHICH IS AN OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OR USE IN THE LDC LISTED BUSINESS USES. WHICH IS A TRANSPORTABLE UNIT, WHICH IS SOMETIMES SEASONAL, WHICH IS SEASONAL AND TEMPORARY LIVING QUARTERS NOT EXCEEDING 400 SQUARE FEET. ALSO A RESTRICTION TO PERIOD OF TIME. BUT BASICALLY IT'S A FIXED NONMOVABLE RV FOR A SHORT-TERM RESORT PARK. THERE ARE TWO OPTIONS. OPTION 1 IS 93 UNITS, OPTION 2 IS 80 UNITS. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DMOATS THAT THE AREA CONSISTS OF -- NOTES THAT THE AREA CONSISTS OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, AND THE TAMPA BYPASS CANAL. COMP PLAN IS CMU-12 THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE AREA. úTHIS IS THE 93-D PLAN THAT IS BEFORE YOU. AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MITIGATIONS FOR THE SITE WHICH INCLUDES THE 30-FOOT WETLAND BUFFER THAT RUNS THROUGH CENTRAL GREENSPACE, WHICH IS GREEN 4U AND TYPE A BUFFERS AS INDICATED TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH AND THERE'S ANOTHER GREENSPACE AMENITY AREA AT THE -- AVENUE. UNDER THE 83-UNIT PLAN, SAME MITIGATIONS HOWEVER THIS OPTION JUST FYI, THE MOBILE HOMES AT THE BOTTOM 25% REMAIN THE SAME.

PLANNING COMMISSION NOTES IT WOULD COMPLEMENT THE RESIDENTIAL IN THE AREA. THAT IT WOULD EFFECTIVELY INTEGRATE IN THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. DENSITY OF THE SITE IS WELL BELOW MAXIMUM PERMITTED. THEY NOTE THAT IT PROVIDES MORE HOUSING OPTIONS WITH AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTION. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES NOTES THE COMPATIBLE WITH ENHANCED BUFFERING AND SCREENING. PRESERVES NATURAL RESOURCES THROUGH THE WETLAND BUFFER, INSTALLATION OF THE A SCREENING AND INCORPORATION OF THE CENTRAL GREENSPACE STORMWATER POND TO ENHANCE THIS AESTHETICS FOR THE SITE. SO WITH THAT WE APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

JUST TWO QUICK QUESTIONS. ONE IS IT APPEARS THERE IS NO LIMIT TO THE MIX BETWEEN THE PARK UNITS AND THE MOBILE HOMES. UNDER EITHER DEVELOPMENT OPTION. IT'S A MAXIMUM OF 93 FOR ONE AND 8Y FOR THE OTHER. AND SO -- 80 FOR THE OTHER, AND SO THERE IS NO LIMIT PROPOSED FOR EACH OF THOSE DEVELOPMENT TYPES. IS THAT CORRECT? > MICHAEL, DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER? I'M NOT SURE. MICHAEL SANDERS, OXBOW ENGINEERING, 4206 NATIONAL GUARD DRIVE IN PLANT CITY, FLORIDA. THAT'S CORRECT. THERE IS NO BLENDING REQUIRED.

OKAY, THANK YOU. AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION PERTAINS TO THE PARK UNIT, THE 120-DAY PER CALENDAR YEAR. TELL ME HOW THAT WORKS. DOES IT APPLY TO ONE PARK UNIT AND THEN THAT ONE LEAVES AT 120 DAYS AND THEN A SECOND ONE COULD COME ON THAT SAME SPACE? THE PARK UNITS DO NOT MOVE. THAT IS OCCUPANCY. SO 1 -- 120 DAYS MAX LEASING. I SEE, AS, THEY'RE OCCUPIED, 120 DAYS. UNDERSTOOD. THOSE ARE MY ONLY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. SIR, CAN YOU COME SIGN IN WITH US? MR. PRESSMAN? MR. PRESSMAN?

GOOD EVENING. CHRIS GRANDLIENARD. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 10.15 ACRES IN THE EAST LAKE ORIENT PARK COMMUNITY PLAN AREA FROM PD AND AS0.4 TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPOSED USE INCLUDES A FIXED UNIT MOBILE HOME AND PARK MODEL RESORT. THE PARK MODEL UNITS WILL REMAIN IN PLACE, BUT MAY ONLY BE RENTED FOR UP TO 120 CONSECUTIVE DAYS AS REQUIRED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE MOBILE HOMES ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THIS TIME LIMIT. THE SITE IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED COMMUNITY MIXED USE 12 ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. TWO SITE PLAN OPTIONS ARE BEING PROPOSED. OPTION 1 UP TO 93 UNITS OR 9.16 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE AND OPTION 2 UP TO 80 UNITS. 7.88 DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE. THE AREA CONSISTS OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, AND THE TAMPA BYPASS CANAL TO THE WEST. ADJACENT TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ARE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. TO THE EAST ACROSS -- AVENUE IS -- CLUES AVENUE IS A CONVENIENCE STORE AND MOBILE HOME PARK. TO THE WEST IS TAMPA BYPASS CANAL. TO ADDRESS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT USES, THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING ENHANCED BUFFERING AND SCREENING, INCLUDING A 30-FOOT WETLAND BUFFER ALONG THE CANAL AND A TYPE A SCREENING WITHIN ALL REQUIRED BUFFERS. A CENTRAL GREENSPACE STORMWATER POND, AND A MULTIUSE TRAIL TO CREATE A PARK-LIKE SETTING. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

NONE AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. PLANNING COMMISSION.

ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE 12 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY. IT IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE EAST LAKE ORIENT PARK COMMUNITY PLAN. WITH THE REQUIRED BUFFERS AND SCREENINGS MEETING THE STANDARDS OF FOR THE SITE AND WITH IT BEING ADJACENT TO OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, PROPOSAL MEETS THE INTENT OF POLICY 3 3.2 AND ASSOCIATED POLICIES. THE PROPOSED USE OF A FIXED UNIT MOBILE HOME PARK WOULD EFFECTIVELY INTEGRATE IN THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA, AND THEREFORE, MEET THE INTENT OF OBJECTIVE 3.1 AND IT'S ASSOCIATED POLICIES AS WELL. WITH THE SITE BEING 10.15 ACRES, THE MAXIMUM UNITS ALLOWED IN THE SITE ARE 121 UNITS. THE PARK RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES SECTION OF THE EAST LAKE ORIENT PARK COMMUNITY PLAN SEEKS TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE EAST LAKE ORIENT PARK'S NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. ONE OF THE STRATEGIES OF THIS GOAL IS TO SEEK NEW PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH APPROVAL OF NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. ANOTHER GOAL WITHIN THE SECTION S TO PROTECT WETLANDS, WHICH IS ALSO BEING MET WITH THE SITE PLAN PROPOSAL AND IS HAS ALSO BEEN APPROVED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMISSION. BASED UPON THOSE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE FOLLOWING GOLDS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FIND THE PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH S. THERE ANYONE IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? ANYONE IN FAVOR? SEEING NO ONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD AND COME FORWARD. WHILE YOU'RE COMING FORWARD, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE EITHER IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN ONSWRIGDZ? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NO ONE, MA'AM, IF YOU COULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

REBECCA YORK, 5,002 CLUES AVENUE. I OWN -- CLEWIS AVENUE. THIS PROPERTY IS SOUTH OF MINE. ANYWAY, THIS COMPANY OWNS SEVERAL MOBILE HOME PARKS ALREADY IN THE AREA. AND EVERY -- SORRY, EVERY ONE OF THEM IS, AND I BELIEVE IT'S LISTED IN THE PAPERWORK THAT I READ FROM THIS HEARING, THAT IT IS BELOW AVERAGE MOBILE HOME PARK, AND I DON'T FEEL THAT WE NEED ANYMORE BELOW AVERAGE MOBILE POEM HOME PARKS. THEY'RE TRYING TO BE THE PARADISE VILLAGE, WHICH IS A PARK THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOREVER, AND IT IS NOT TRAVEL TRAILERS, WHICH THIS ONE IS CALLING FOR AS WELL, TRAVEL TRAILERS. BECAUSE IF YOU PARK A TRAVEL TRAILER, IT'S KIND OF -- MOBILE HOME THEY TAKE THE WHEELS OFF. A TRAFFIC TRAILER THEY DON'T TAKE THE TRAILS -- TRAVEL TRAILER THEY DON'T TAKE THE WHEELS OFF WHICH MEANS THEY'RE COMING AND GOING, SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH AT THE END OF THAT IS NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT IS THERE NOW. THEY'VE MADE ABSOLUTELY NO IMPROVEMENTS TO ANY OF THE MOBILE HOME PARKS THAT THEY ALREADY OWN IN THE AREA. AND THE ONE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ADD TO THIS, IT'S ONE OF THOSE YOU WOULD HAVE TO SEE IN ORDER TO BELIEVE IT, AND I'VE LIVED ON MOY PROPERTY MY ENTIRE LIFE. WHICH IS A LITTLE MORE THAN 25 YEARS, BUT I MEAN, MY ENTIRE LIFE I LIVED THERE. AND I HAVE WATCHED EVERYTHING. I WAS THERE BEFORE THE BYPASS CANAL WAS THERE. AND THIS WAS JUST ADDING MORE TO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO GET. WHEN I ASKED WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE WATER SYSTEM AND A SEWER SYSTEM, I WAS TOLD THAT THEY'RE GOING HOOK TO CITY WATER. WELL, WE'RE IN THE COUNTY, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'RE GOING TO HOOK TO CITY WATER. AND AS FAR AS THE SEWER SYSTEM, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S GOING TO -- YOU KNOW, WHERE THAT'S

GOING TO END UP. AND I SET THROUGH HURRICANE MILTON WHEN IT JUST CAME THROUGH, AND I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT A TRAVEL TRAILER WOULD LOOK LIKE WITH THE WINDS THAT WE GOT BECAUSE IT PICKED UP A LOT OF THINGS IN MY PROPERTY -- ON MY PROPERTY THAT ENDED UP SOMEWHERE ELSE. AND A TRAVEL -- AND THEY WERE JUST LIKE CARPORTS. A TRAVEL TRAILER IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT, AND IT'S GOING TO LAND INTO ONE OF THE MOBILE HOMES THAT'S THERE STATIONARY. AND I DON'T KNOW, AND AS I SAY, THE PEOPLE THAT COME IN THERE TO DO THAT, THEY DON'T LIVE IN THIS COUNTY, AND ONCE THEY'RE THERE, THEY'RE JUST THERE FOR HOW MUCH RENT ARE WE GOING TO GET EVERY MONTH, BUT THEY DON'T SEE IT, THEY DON'T MAINTAIN IT, AND I'M NOT SURE THEY'RE GOING TO MAIN MAINTAIN THIS IF THEY CAN'T MAINTAIN WHAT'S ALREADY THERE. AND THE OTHER THING I'M SURE THAT IT'S NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP AND SOMEBODY TOLD ME TODAY THAT I SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT IT UP WITH FWC THAT THERE ARE EAGLES NESTS IN THE TREES ONLY THAT PROPERTY THAT IS JUST NEXT TO MINE: AND THE TRAILERS THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE IS A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN. SO IT'S THE ONES RIGHT NEXT TO ME THAT HAVE THE TREES WITH THE EVERYTHING IN IT. THE OWLS AND SO I KNOW. THEY'VE ALREADY COME IN ON THE WEEKENDS AND KNOCKED OVER A LOT OF THE TREES THAT WERE IN THERE, SO NOW I GUESS THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY OR GET APPROVAL TO DO THAT ONCE THEY, YOU KNOW, START WITH THEIR THING. AND FENCING, I DON'T KNOW, ARE THEY LISTING WHAT KIND OF FENCES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT UP THAT SEPARATES THEM FROM THE REST OF THE AREA? BECAUSE AS I SAY, THE TRAILER PARKS THAT ARE THERE, THAT ARE ESTABLISHED, NOT THE ONES THAT WERE BOUGHT UP IN 2008 WHEN EVERYTHING HIT AND THEY CAME IN

AND BOUGHT ALL THE PROPERTIES, THEY'RE MAINTAINED. I MEAN, IF THEY NEED SECURITY, THEY OFFER SECURITY, AND ALOT OF THEM ARE FAMILY, AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANOTHER ONE. AS I SAY, I MEAN, BEING THERE MY WHOLE LIFE, I'VE WATCHED IT ALL, AND I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, WE'VE GOT TWO APARTMENT COMPLCOMPLEXES ON THE END NOW. THEY'RE MAINTAINED AND THEY'RE BUILDING ANOTHER ONE NOT FAR AWAY, CONDOMINIUMS I BELIEVE THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD, AND THAT'S WHAT JUST FROM, I MEAN, JUST TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY IS A BIG OPEN SPACE, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT ALSO APARTMENT COMPLEXES BECAUSE IT'S NOW ALL OVERLOOKING THE BYPASS CANAL. SO I THINK THAT THEY'RE USING THAT FOR, YOU KNOW, THEIR DRAWINGS AND WHAT HAVE YOU DO NOT ARTICULATE WHAT'S ACTUALLY THERE. AND IT'S ONE OF THOSE I WISH PEOPLE COULD GO AND LOOK BEFORE THEY SAY APPROVED BECAUSE IT'S NOT AS IT APPEARS TO BE, AND I JUST THINK THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS BETTER THAN THAT.

THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN. IF YOU COULD PLEASE SIGN IN WIH THE CLERK'S OFFICE. ANYONE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? YES, SIR. YOU COULD START BY GIVING US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. HI, MY NAME IS MICHAEL BLAKE. MY ADDRESS IS 5102CLEWSI AVENUE, TAMPA, FLORIDA, 33610. THANK YOU.

I LIVE A LITTLE NORTH OF THE TRAILER PARK THERE HE'S TRYING TO PUT IN, AND HE ALREADY OWNS THIS COMPANY ALREADY OWNS THREE, FOUR, FIVE OTHER DIFFERENT PROPERTIES, MOBILE HOMES PARKS ON CLEWIS AVENUE. THEY'RE NOT UPKEPT. WE HAVE PROBLEMS WITH SEWAGE. WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER TRAILER PARK ON CLEWIS AVENUE. THE ROADS CANNOT BEAR ANOTHER 93 OR 150 TRAILERS ON CLE WIS AVENUE. WE HAVE ENOUGH TRAFFIC GOING IN AND OUT. THE TRAILER PARKS THAT HE OWNS ALREADY IS NOT EVEN FULL. HALF OF THEM ARE EMPTY, AND THEY CANNOT LIVE IN THOSE MOBILE HOMES THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE. NOW, HE OWNS A HOUSE, NO ONE CAN LIVE IN IT. YOU CAN'T. CODE SAID YOU CAN'T LIVE IN IT. SO TO ADD TO WHAT HE ALREADY HAS, DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. FIRST TAKE CAKE OF WHAT YOU ALREADY -- TAKE CARE OF WHAT YOU ALREADY HAVE. TAKE CARE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT YOUR TRAILER PARKS THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE. IF YOU'VE DONE THAT, THEN YOU COULD BE AWARDED SOMETHING ELSE. BUT IF YOU LOOK LIKE MY NEIGHBOR SAID, IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S THERE NOW, YOU WILL SAY NO FREAKING WAY. DO WE NEED, DO WE NEED TRAILER PARKS? DO WE NEED AN RV PARK? NO. GO SOMEWHERE WHERE THAT COULD BE USED AND ENJOYED. NOT A COMMUNITY. DO WE NEED RVs TO GO IN AND OUT AND STAY WEN 20 DAYS OR -- 120 DAYS OR?

NO. WE GOT ENOUGH OF THAT IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. DO WE NEED TENTS? DO WE NEED, WHERE YOU GO HAVE PEOPLE JUST UN-- I WOULD SAY UNDERDESERVING -- NOT REALLY DESERVING. I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT. BUT LESS FORTUNATE TO COME IN WITH THE RIFFRAFF AND TO COME IN AND GO OUT. THEY'RE IN ONE WEEK, OUT THE NEXT. WE DON'T NEED THAT. NO MRE ON CLEWIS AVENUE. PARADISE VILLAGE IS LOADED, THEY PUT MORE THAN ENOUGH TRAILERS THERE. THEY WERE, THEY'RE OVERPOPULATED THAT THEY ADD THE THOUSAND TRAILERS IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. THEY CAN'T EVEN HANDLE THE SEWAGE IN THAT AREA. AND WE DO NOT HAVE ANY CITY, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SEWAGE WATER IN THE AREA FOR THIS MOBILE HOME PARK TO HOOK INTO. THE TAMPA BYPASS CANAL TO BE RESERVE AND NATURAL PLACE FOR THEM TO ENJOY THE WHOLE CANAL. IT SOUNDS GOOD WITH THE WORD RESORT, BUT IT WAS A LONG WAYS FROM A RESORT. AND TO ME IF YOU LOOK OUT WEST THERE, THE COLORFUL TRAILERS, BRIGHT YELLOW, BRIGHT GREEN, BRIGHT RED,. IT DON'T DESERVE TO BE -- IT LOOKS LIKE A FUNNY BILL. AND I'M TRYING TO SAY THAT IS THAT THE TRASH, I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT WRONG, BUT WHAT WE'VE SEEN THERE, WE SHOULDN'T DESERVE IT. AND MY BIGGEST THING IS THIS. IF YOU TAKE CARE WHAT YOU

ALREADY HAVE, THEN MAYBE YOU COULD GET SOMETHING BETTER, BUT OR MORE. BUT TO PUT 10 ACRES AND PUT 100 OR SO TRAILERS AND MAKE IT AN RV PARK IS NOT SUITABLE AND IT SHOULD NOT GO. AND I WOULD REALLY CONSIDER THE COMMISSION TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION TO WHAT THEY'RE REALLY TRYING TO DO. THE WORD RESORT SOUNDS GOOD, BUT WHEN YOU GO OUT THERE AND LOOK WHAT'S THERE, YOU WOULD SAY OH, NO. I WOULD NOT WANT TO BE IN THIS AREA OR IN THIS TRAILER PARK. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, SIR. IF YOU COULD PLEASE SIGN IN. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO ONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION, WE'LL GO BACK TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. MS. HEINRICH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD, WHICH THE APPLICANT MAYBE ADDRESSING IN HIS REBUTTAL IS THAT THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS PROJECT IS THESE WON'T BE RVs PER SE. THEY'LL BE A DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATION CALLED A PARK MODEL, AND PER THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, THEY HAVE TO STAY AFFIXED ON THE GROUND. PEOPLE CAN COME AND GO BUT THE RSs UNLIKE OTHER PARKS WILL N NOT BEING ENTERING AND EXITINEXITINGTHE PARKS. CAN YOU GO OVER THE REQUIREMENTS IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO IN TERMS OF THE NEXT STEP, THE SITE PLAN REVIEW, GENTLEMAN AND THE MS. YORK ALSO MEASURED THE EAGLES NEST, THE FENCING, THE CONNECTION TO CITY WATER. CAN YOU JUST ADDRESS WHAT STEPS ARE APPLICABLE TO THAT?

SURE. IF THE REZONING IS APPROVED, THEN THE NEXT STEPWOULD BE FOR THE APPLICANT TO GO THROUGH A SITE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS MORE OF LIKE A HORIZONTAL PLAN LOOKING AT LIKE A BIRD'S EYE VIEW WHERE THINGS ARE LOCATED, WHAT SITE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE NECESSARY. I BELIEVE IN THIS PROPOSAL THEY ARE PROPOSING BUFFERING AND SCREENING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE FOR COMPATIBILITY REASONS. IT IS IN THE CITY OF TAMPA WATER SERVICE AREA SO IT WOULD BE SERVICED BY THEM. ALSO THIS IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA, SO THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO CONNECT TO COUNTY UTILITIES AND AT THAT TIME, ALL THE DIFFERENT REVIEWING AGENCIES WOULD LOOK AT IT JUST STORMWATER, NATURAL RESOURCES, IN TERMS OF YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE EAGLE'S NEST, I DON'T SEE THAT ON OUR GIS. NOT OF COURSE THEY COULD COME AND GO, BUT NATURAL RESOURCES IS A REVIEWER FOR EACH AND EVERY SITE, AND WOULD CHECK FOR THINGS LIKE THAT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT, AND ENCROACHMENTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. TRANSPORTATION ALSO WOULD REVIEW IT AND THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ANY IMPROVEMENTS THAT'S GOING TO BE REQUIRED, ANY ACCESS POINTS, AND ZONING WOULD ALSO BE A REVIEWER TO LOOK AT THINGS LIKE THE SETBACKS, BUFFERING AND SCREENING, THINGS LIKE THAT BEING PROVIDED ON THE PLAN.

ALL RIGHT, PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THEN MR. PRESSMAN, WE'LL GO BACK TO YOU. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.

THANK YOU, HEARING OFFICER. AND MICHELLE, EVERYTHING MICHELLE SAID WAS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, THAT THESE WOULD BE STATIONARY UNITS. THEY WOULD NOT BE LEAVING. THEY REMAIN WHERE THEY ARE. THE GOOD NEWS, WITH RESPECT TO THE RESIDENTS WHO SPOKE, IS THAT THIS PARK IS GOING TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVED. SO THE PARK MOBILE UNITS WILL BE ALL NEW. THEY'LL BE BROUGHT IN NEW FOR PLACEMENT AT THE SITE. WATER AND SEWER ARE GOING TO BE HOOKED UP, AND ROADWAY IS GOING TO BE IMPROVED. SO THESE ARE MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY, WHICH I THINK THE RESIDENTS WHO HAD SOME CONCERNS WILL BE VERY HAPPY WITH. I'LL JUST REMIND YOU THAT PLANNING COMMISSION AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAVE SUPPORTED THIS REQUEST VERY STRONGLY IN TERMS OF COMPATIBILITY. AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTION, AND NOTING THE PRESERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES AND MITIGATION THAT ARE PROPOSED, I'LL ALSO INDICATE TOO THAT WE NOTICED 21 PERSONS, AND WE HEARD FROM TWO RESIDENTS THIS EVENING BUT THERE WERE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR E-MAILS THAT I WAS AWARE OF.

ALL RIGHT, DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR REBUTTAL? YES, MICHAEL, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? NEE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. WITH THAT WE'LL CLOSE RZ-PD 25-0809, AND GO TO THE NEXT CASE. OUR NEXT APPLICATION IS ITEM D.2, MAJOR MOD 25-0810. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO P D-10-0692. TIM LAMPKIN WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL PROVIDE STAFF FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MS. FINCH. JAKE CREMER WITH BARBAS CRAMER, 2,002 WEST CLEVELAND STREET NUMBER 2003. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF TECHNICAL DETAILS WE'LL TALK ABOUT TONIGHT, SO I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO BRING ALL OF OUR EXPERTS UP RIGHT AWAY, BUT THEY'RE ALL HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, AND WE'LL GET INTO SOME OF THOSE AREAS OF EXPERTISE TONIGHT. BUT I WANTED TO SIMPLIFY BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONDITIONS DEALING WITH THIS APPLICATION. THERE IS A UNIQUE LAND USE CATEGORY WE'RE DEALING WITH CALLED THE ENERGY INNOVATION PARK. AND BASICALLY WE'RE HERE BECAUSE THE BOARD APPROVED ABOUT A YEAR AGO AN UPDATE TO THIS OR A MODERNIZATION IF YOU WILL TO THIS EIP LAND USE CATEGORY. SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE DOING TONIGHT YOU'LL SEE IS IS STREAMLINING AND TAKING THAT MODERNIZATION INTO THE CONDITIONS. THE BIGGEST ONE BEING THAT THE BOARD APPROVED US TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONSIDERATION OF THE DOVER FARMS RESIDENTIAL AREA ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS PROJECT. WE BELIEVE THAT OVERALL A RESIDENTIAL LAND USE AREA THAT WE'RE REQUESTING TO ADD AS AN OPTION IS A BETTER TRANSITION THAN THE INDUSTRIAL TYPE USES THAT ARE APPROVED IN THAT AREA TODAY. SO THAT'D BE THE MAIN THRUST OF OUR APPLICATION. OVERALL, THIS PROPERTY IS ROUGHLY 3,000IC AERS. NOW THERE ARE TWO LAND -- TWO LANDOWNERS. THE RESIDENTIAL IS A PART OF THE UNIVERSITY ENERGY PARK OWNER ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. TO OUR KNOWLEDGE THIS IS IN LARGEST REDEVELOPABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARIES.

SO THE EXISTING LAND USE IS EIP. THE CHANGES THE BOARD MADE LAST YEAR MEANS THAT THIS WILL BE THE ONLY EIP WE SEE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. SO IT'S QUITE UNIQUE. AND THEN THE LAND USE CATEGORIES REQUIRES A PD WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE FOR THE MODIFICATION TODAY. NOW TO SET THE SCENE, THIS IS IN A PLANNED GROWTH CORRIDOR AGAIN WITH THE LARGE REDEVELOPABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE USA. WE'RE ALSO BASICALLY ON THE DOOR STEP OF PLANT CITY'S FUTURE GROWTH PLANS FOR THE CITY. AND JUST TO TOUCH ON THE MODERNIZATION OF WHAT THE BOARD APPROVED LAST YEAR, IT WAS A STREAMLINING BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THE VISION FOR A VERY LARGE USER TO COME IN, PURCHASE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, AND THEN BUILD OUT AROUND THE ENERGY GENERATING USE TO BUILD A VERY LARGE INDUSTRIAL PARK, THAT NEVER MATERIALIZED, AND SO THE BOARD WORKED WITH US TO FIGURE OUT HOW CAN WE GET THIS LARGE PROPERTY INTO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN START TO SEE SOME DEVELOPMENT, AND WHAT THE BOARD DIRECTED US TO DO IS CONSIDER MAKING THIS A MIXED USE PROJECT WHERE PEOPLE CAN LIVE AND WORK ON THE PROPERTY. AND AGAIN KIND OF KEEPING WITH THE THEME, THE BOARD WAS L LOOKG AT THIS AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY WERE REQUESTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR I-4 CORRIDOR STUDY, SO AGAIN YOU CAN START TO SEE THE GROWTH TRAJECTORY THE BOARD IS PROJECTING OUT HERE WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE GROWTH OF PLANT CITY, THE I-4, USA EXPANSION STUDY, AND THEN OUR PROPERTY, THE ENERGY AND INNOVATION PARK IN THE YELLOW. SO WITH THAT I'M GOING TO HAVE OUR LAND USE PLANNER DAVID SMITH WALK YOU THROUGH THE SITE PLAN AND WHAT THE DIFFERENT PODS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT ARE FOR.

GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, DAVID SMITH, 401 EAST JACKSON STREET. DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT AND ZONING FOR STEARNS WEAVER MILLER. JAKE LAID THE GROUNDWORK PRETTY SOLIDLY. THE CURRENTLY APPROVED PD PLAN, THIS IS A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO IT, THE EASTERN PORTION CAME TO A MAJOR MOD JUST RECENTLY, AND WE ARE PIGGYBACKING ON THAT TO ADD THE RESIDENTIAL OPTION AND DO SOME HOUSE CLEANING ON THE INDUSTRIAL PARK. THE PROPOSED PLAN, AGAIN, UPDATES THE ZONING CONDITIONS RELATED TO CONTEMPORARY ENERGY PRACTICES AND ALLOWS FOR UP TO 1200 RESIDENTIAL HOMES ON, AS AN OPTION ON PARCEL E. THERE IS A MAXIMUM OF SIX MILLION 116,318 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION USES M ZONING DISTRICT, AND THERE WERE ALSO REQUIREMENTS FOR ENERGY PRODUCTION BEFORE THESE USES CAN BE MOVING FORWARD. THIS IS SUPPORTS THE, THE THRESHOLD THAT ONLY 30% OF THE LAND SHOULD BE USED FOR INDUSTRIAL LAND AREA. POCKET A IS THE COMMERCIAL CORE ALONG STATE ROAD 60 THE PROPOSAL IS WAY BELOW THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED FOR IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. POCKET E NONRESIDENTIAL WHICH IS REALLY THE KEY FOCUS AND WHAT MOST OF THE CONDITIONS, ALL 38-PLUS CONDITIONS IN THIS ZONING REALLY ADDRESS. THE RESIDENTIAL OPTION IN POCKET E IS OUTLINED IN GREEN. CURRENTLY IT ALLOWS AN ARRAY OF AN ENERGY USES. WE BELIEVE THE INTRODUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL HERE PROVIDES FOR A TRANSITION BETWEEN THE RES 1 TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS THE RURAL AREA, TO THE RES-4 AND RES-6 ALONG DOVER ROAD, AND ALSO PROVIDES FOR THIS TRANSITION TO THE INDUSTRIAL USES IN OTHER WORDS OF CS -- ON THE OTHER SIDE

OF CSX. HERE IS THE POCKET E RESIDENTIAL OPTION PLAN THAT IS THE APPLICATION, PROVIDES ACCESS TO DOVER ROAD, PROVIDES FOR TWO ACCESS STUB-OUTS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD IT OCCUR ON THE SOUTHERN BO BOUNDARY, AND AO AN EMERGENCY ACCESS, PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ON HINSON ROAD. SO LOOKING AT THE MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL OPTION, 1200 RESIDENTIAL UNITS OF VARYING TYPES, THE, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE THREE UNITS PER ACRE THAT IS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, IT DOES PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, FOR TRANSITION SO WE GOT FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, THERE IS FOUR AND SIX ON ACROSS DOVER. THERE ARE RES 1 USES TO OUR SOUTH. A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES, YOU'LL SEE IN THE ZONING CONDITIONS, WE PROVIDE FOR FULL RANGE OF ATTACHED, DETACHED, YOU KNOW, T&D STYLE TOWNHOMES. NO MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN A TRADITIONAL SENSE FOR THIS PLAN. WE HAVE AN ACRE COMMUNITY GATHERING SPACE. BIG ISSUE AND BIG CONCERN WERE THE BERMS THAT ARE CURRENTLY EXISTING OUT THERE. THEY HAVE 200-FOOT BUFFER AND THIS 200-FOOT BUFFER WAS PUT IN PLACE FOR THE INDUSTRIAL USES THAT WERE ANTICIPATED TO COME TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL. IN A RESIDENTIAL USE, THESE LARGE BUFFERS ARE IN FACT NOT REQUIRED AT ALL. WE WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO PLACE ANY BUFFERS TO THE SOUTH ALONG THIS PROPERTY. NOR WOULD WE TO DOVER. WE HAVE THOUGH PROPOSED 100-FOOT WIDE BUFFER ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY. THIS IS ALSO GOING TO COMMIT TO THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN THE CODE ALREADY, BUT ALSO ALLOW FOR VARIETY OF OTHER USES TO BE INTRODUCED, SOLAR WIND ELEMENTS, TRAILS, OTHER MANY MAYBE SOME STORMWATER AREAS. AND THEN ALONG DOVER ROAD WE HAVE A 50-FOOT WIDE BUFFER, AND

THIS BUFFER WILL ALSO WILL INCLUDE THE LANDSCAPING TYPICALLY EXPECTED IN THE CODE BUT ALSO PROVIDE FOR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, SIGNAGE, LIGHTING, FENCING, STORMWATER, AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES. ALSO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE OTHER CHANGES JUST REAL QUICK, POCKET I, POCKET I WAS THE BUFFER PARCEL THAT WAS AROUND PRETTY MUCH THE EAST AND THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE ENERGY PARK. IN THE INDUSTRIAL OPTION, IT REMAINS 200-FOOT IN WIDE, AND THE BERMS IN PLACE. IN THE RESIDENTIAL OPTION THOUGH, THOSE BERMS WOULD COME OUT AND BE REPLACED IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR THE ACCESS THAT WILL BE SPOKEN TO IN A FEW MINUTES, AND ALSO PROVIDE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE. POCKET J IS ANOTHER CHANGE. IT REALLY WAS PUT IN AS A BUFFER, BUT THERE IS REALLY NO BUFFER TO BE MADE THERE. THERE IS NOT -- IT DOESN'T IMMEDIATELY ABUT ANY OTHER EIP USE, SO WE'RE D DESIGNATING -- BASED UPON BUFFERING AND SCREENING. RESIDENTIAL AGAINST RESIDENTIAL HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN RECOGNIZED AS COMPATIBLE. ESPECIALLY AT THE DENSITY AND INTENSITY THAT WE'RE PROPOSING ON THIS SITE. PROVIDES FOR A GRADUAL TRANSITION OF DENSITY, COMPATIBLE WITH THE PLANNED AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. WE PRESERVE, ENHANCE AND PRESERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITIES BY THE LAYOUT OF THIS, WHICH IS BASICALLY PULLS THE RESIDENTIAL USES AWAY FROM THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY. INTERNALLY LOCATES THEM. CONSISTENT WITH THE EIP FUTURE

LAND USE, 2.58 UNITS PER ACRE, WELL UNDER THE DENSITY THAT IS ALLOWED IN THE COMP PLAN. IT'S IN THE SITE PLAN CONTROLLED DISTANCE AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH BUFFERING AND PERMITTING ENHANCED BUFFERING WAS REQUIRED IN THE COMP PLAN. WE'VE ACHIEVED THAT WITH THE EXTRAORDINARY BUFFERS IN THE RESIDENTIAL OPTION. THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY OF THE USES AROUND US. CONTEXTUALLY, LOWER DENSITY USES TO THE SOUTH, TRADITIONAL SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOODS TO THE WEST, AND EIP TO OUR NORTH. WITH THAT I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MICHAEL YATES TO TALK ABOUT TRANSPORTATION.

I DO HAVE JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. I HAVE SOME TRANSPORTATION QUESTIONS THAT I'LL SAIFN FOR MR. YATES. -- SAVE FOR MR. YATES. FIRST TO CONFIRM THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE HOTEL AND MOTEL IN POCKET A IS COMING FROM POCKET B'S ENTITLEMENTS. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT, THAT WAS ANOTHER CHANGE I MEANT TO EMPHASIZE. THE ONLY CHANGE TO THE COMMERCIAL CONDITIONS WAS TO ALLOW HOTEL/MOTEL, AND THOSE, THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE IS COMING OUT OF THE COMMERCIAL 350. OKAY. AND THE 1200 DWELLING UNITS, ANY TYPE OR MIX OF THE DWELLING UNITS, I KNOW THERE IS NO MULTIFAMILY BUT OF OTHER THAN THAT COULD BE A MIX OF ANY COMBINATION.

RIGHT, ANY COMBINATION OF THOSE, SQUARE THAT RESIDENTIAL'S ALLOWED ON SITE, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRE PARCEL OTHER THAN THE BUFFERS. UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION, IF YOU CAN, THE EPC COMMENTS REGARDING THE SUPERFUND SITE JUST WANT TO ENSURE OF COURSE THAT THIS RESIDENTIAL IS NOWHERE NEAR. NO, IT'S ABOUT 4,000 FEET NORTH OF THE RESIDENTIAL, AND JAKE WILL BE SPEAKING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS ASKED TO BE INCLUDED IN ANY ACTION MOVING FORWARD LATER IN THE PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT, THAT WAS IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, MICHAEL YATES WITH PALM TRAFFIC. 4,006 SOUTH McDILL AVENUE. JUST GO OVER A LITTLE BIT OF THE TRANSPORTATION AND I CAN ANSWER ANY OF THE QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. THERE ARE TRIP CAPS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. I THINK IT'S CONDITION 26 TRANSPORTATION DID ISSUE I BELIEVE A UPDATE TO THAT TODAY. BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE WERE DOING IS WE WERE TAKING THE 2010 TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS DONE FOR THIS PROJECT, AND WE KEPT THOSE TRIP NUMBERS CONSISTENT FOR THE ENERGY PARK, EITHER UNIVERSITY ENERGY PARK AND THE TURKEY CREEK PRESERVE. NOWTROPNOW THERE WAS FOR THE TUY CREEK PRESERVE A SCRIVENER'S ERROR IN THE ZONING FOR THAT, AND SO THAT IS BEING CORRECTED WITH THIS CHANGE IN THE CONDITIONS, AND SO BUT THE 2010 TRIP CAP IS REMAINING TOTAL IN PLACE, AND THAT IS HOW THE TRIP CAPS WERE BASED. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT IF THE POCKET E IS DEVELOPED FOR RESIDENTIAL, THAT HAS ITS OWN TRIP CAP, AND THAT IS REFLECTED IN THE CONDITIONS AS WELL. AND SO THE TRAFFIC STUDY WAS EVALUATING THE IMPACTS OF POCKET E IF IT WAS A DEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL.

THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS. JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CLEAR. SO EVERYTHING ELSE HAS ITS OWN TRIP CAP, AND THE RESIDENTIAL IS NOT A PART OF THAT. THAT HAS ITS OWN SEPARATE, AND IT'S 26-2 IS THE CONDITION. CORRECT. SO IT'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, THOSE TRIP CAP NUMBERS. CORRECT. SO THE RESIDENTIAL IS ONLY APPLICABLE IF POCKET E IS DEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL. OTHERWISE THE WHOLE ENERGY PARK AND THE TURKEY CREEK PRESERVE WILL BE ONE TRIP CAP. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. AND THEN THEY'RE DIVIDED UP SEPARATELY, SO YOU CAN SEE THOSE TRIPS AMONGST EACH OF THOSE PARCELS SINCE TH THEY'RE UNDER DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP. OKAY. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? I WAS JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH THE ACCESS POINTS. YEAH, GO AHEAD.

WE DIVIDE WORK WITH TRANSPORTATION STAFF IN DEVELOPING THE ACCESS POINTS. YOU CAN SEE ON THE GRAPHIC THERE ARE THREE ACCESS POINTS ALONG DOVER ROAD FOR THE RESIDENTIAL. THEY ARE THREE ROUNDABOUTS. THEY WILL HELP SERVE AS THE ACCESS BUT ALSO AS TRAFFIC CALMING OBDOVER ROAD BECAUSE IT'S A PRETTY STRAIGHT ROAD ALL THE WAY FROM 60 TO DURANT, AND SO THESE WILL ACT AS SOME TRAFFIC CALMING. THERE IS ALSO CIP PROJECT AT DURANT AND DOVER WHERE THE COUNTY IS DOING A CIP INSTALLATION OF A ROUNDABOUT THERE. WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN DESIGN. SO THIS WILL TIE INTO THE, THOSE CIP PROJECTS AS A CONTINUOUS SECTION. WE DO MEET ACCESS SPACING, AND WE HAVE OFFSET THE NORTHERN TWO ROUNDABOUTS, AND DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS TO BE OFFSET OF THE RESIDENTIAL EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS ON THE WEST SIDE OF DOVER AT THE REQUEST OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS WITH THOSE ADJACENT RESIDENTS. THAT IS ALL I REALLY HAVE ON TRANSPORTATION UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

I DO HAVE ONE SPECIFIC QUESTION, AND THAT PERTAINS TO D.O.T.'S COMMENTS IN THE FILE FOR THIS. THERE IS ONE COMMENT FROM JULY THAT OBJECTS TO THE ACCESS PROPOSED. AND IT SAYS, AND IT WANTS TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE APPROVAL FROM CSX TO CROSS THOSE TRACKS. > WE DO NOT HAVE APPROVAL FROM CSX. I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME PRELIMINARY MEETINGS IN TRYING TO GAIN ACCESS TO CROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS, BUT DURING THOSE INITIAL MEETINGS, THAT THE CSX WAS NOT WILLING TO GRANT, THE RESIDENTIAL TO CROSS THE CSX RAILROAD TRACKS UNLESS THE COUNTY WAS WILLING TO GIVE UP MULTIPLE EXISTING LOCATIONS.

AND SO WHERE DOES THAT STAND? SO AS OF NOW, THE, THE POTENTIAL TO CROSS THE CSX IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT WE DID PUT FORTH AN EFFORT AND TRY TO COORDINATE THOSE AND HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS. ALL RIGHT, AND SO WHERE WOULD THE ACCESS BE IF YOU CAN'T CROSS THE TRACKS? IT WOULD, THE ACCESS TO DOVER ROAD WOULD BE SOLELY TO DOVER ROAD. THAT WOULD BE IT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL? CORRECT. AND THAT IS WHAT WAS EVALUATED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND SHOWN ON THE PLAN.

ALL RIGHT. SO THE PIECE ABOUT YOU, ABOUT THE COUNTY HAVING TO RELINQUISH OTHER ACCESS POINTS AND SO FORTH, IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DONE IF YOUR ACCESS IS GRANTED SOLELY TO DOVER ROAD. CORRECT. UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN.

> THANK YOU, JAKE CREMER AGAIN. AS YOU KNOW, THE TWO MAIN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT THE BOARD DIRECTED US TO WORK ON ON THIS PROPERTY ARE THE SUPER FUND SITE. NOW SUPER23U7D AS YOU KNOW IS WHERE EPA ESSENTIALLY TAKES JURISDICTION AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVERSEES THE CLEAN-UP OF A SITE. NOW THIS IS A HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SITE SO THE COUNTY HAS ACTUALLY BEEN CLEANING THAT UP AND THE WORK IS ESSENTIALLY DONE BUT THE BOARD DIRECTED US TO MAKE SURE WE CONTINUED WORKING WITH THEM AND THE EPA. THE OTHER ISSUE THE BOARD DIRECTED US TO DEAL WITH IS THE PROPERTY IS A FORMER PHOSPHATE MINE, AND SO THIS WAS FROM BEFORE THE TIME WHEN WE HAD MODERN REGULATIONS. AND SO THIS PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF DEP UNDER A PROGRAM THAT SPECIFICALLY FOR THOSE OLDER MINING SITES, AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS ON THIS PROPERTY. AND SO THERE WERE THREE MAIN CONDITIONS THAT THE BOARD ASKED US TO LOOK AT OR THREE MAIN DIRECTIONS THE BOARD ASKED US, AND TO BOIL T THEM DOWN, IT WASO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING THE APPROPRIATE TYPE OF TESTING. WE WERE T MAKE SURE WE CONTINUE AND PROVIDE COMMITMENTS TO CONTINUE COORDINATING WITH ALL OF THE AGENCIES, AND NUMBER THREE, THAT WORK THROUGH HOW, HOW AND WHEN RESIDENTIAL COULD BE ALLOWED. AND SO WE WORKED THROUGH A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS. THERE ARE THREE OR FOUR PAGES OF CONDITIONS THAT AGAIN OUR EXPERTS ARE HERE IF WE NEED MORE EXPLANATION, BUT WE DESCRIBED HOW THOSE ASSESSMENTS AND WHEN THEY WILL OCCUR AND WHAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE THE COUNTY WITH, AND THERE'S ALSO A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS THAT DEAL WITH GAMMA EMISSIONS AS WELL AS RADON AND SO THERE IS SORT OF A THREE-LEGGED STOOL OF TESTING, MITIGATION, AND PHYSICAL BARRIERS THAT WE'LL BE USING. AND THEN FINALLY WE ESTABLISHED THE PROTECTIONS FROM THE DIOXANE PLUME, AND WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD TO BE CLEAR UNTIL THE

COUNTY GETS TO AN APPROPRIATE PART IN THE COUNTY'S TESTING AND CLEAN-UP. SO WITH THAT I DO HAVE MORE ON ENVIRONMENTAL, BUT I CAN SAVE THAT FOR REBUTTAL OR IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. NO, I ASKED MY, JUST FOR CONFIRMATION THAT THIS RESIDENTIAL IS NOWHERE NEAR THAT AREA. THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE ALMOST A MILE AWAY AND THE SUPERFUND SITE ITSELF IS RATHER SMALL. WHAT HAPPENS IS THE EPA REQUIRES EVERYONE TO PLACE A DECLARATION OF COVENANTS ON A LARGER AREA, AND THE REASON THEY DO IS TO MAKE SURE CERTAIN THINGS LIKE STORMWATER RESTRICTIONS FOR EXAMPLE ARE MOIRB PROTECTIVE OF THAT -- MORE PROTECTIVE OF THAT SMALLER SITE OVERALL.

UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT, DOES THAT COMPLETE YOUR PRESENTATION? IT DOES.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH LT THEN WE WILL TURB TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICE -- THEN WE WILL TURN TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. GOOD EVENING 92 GOOD EVENING, TIM LAMPKIN, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. WE DID A REVISED REPORT. MOST OF THEM WERE MINOR REVISIONS, THERE WAS A DATE THAT WAS INCORRECT. SUBCONDITION 26.1 WASN'T UNDERLINED. CONDITION 7, THERE WAS SOME MODIFICATIONS. AND ADDITIONALLY AFTER I FINISHED MY PRESENTATION, I BELIEVE JAMES RATLIFF WANTED TO SPEAK TO THE TRANSPORTATION REPORT REVISIONS.

OKAY.

AND WITH THAT, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 3,000 ACRES AS WE'VE HEARD. IT'S LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EAST STATE ROAD 60 AND SOUTH DOVER ROAD, WEST OF TURKEY CREEK DRIVE. AND AS YOU'RE AWARE, THERE'S BEEN A RECENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT LAST YEAR WHICH WAS HC/CPA 23-15 AND IT AMENDED THE TEXT OF THE EIP POLICY. THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION 25-810 BASICALLY THE MAIN COMPONENT IS IT'S PROPOSING ARE SE A SECOND OPTION E TO POCKET E -- AS APPROVED IN THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE ENERGY INNOVATION PARK. ADDITIONAL REVISIONS INCLUDE MODIFYING THE ACREAGE OF POCKET I, WHICH THE APPLICANT DISCUSSED, WHICH IS CURRENTLY A BUFFER POCKET, TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR REDUCED BUFFER AREA IF POCKET E IS DEVELOPED WITH THE RESIDENTIAL OPTION. MODIFYING POCKET TO REDESIGNATE AS OPEN SPACE -- TO REFLECT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS. THE APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSES TO ALLOW HOTELS AND MOTELS IN POCKET A. POCKET A IS DIRECTLY SOUTH OF STATE ROAD 60 IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE EIP. CURRENTLY HOTELS AND MOTELS ARE PROHIBITED USES, AND THE APPLICANT DOES PROPOSE AMENDING TO INCLUDE HOTEL AND MOTEL USES IN THE PERMITTED USE LIST FOR POCKET A ONLY. GIVEN THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITHIN POCKET E, STAFF FINDS WOULD BE A COMPATIBLE USE. POCKET E WILL RETAIN THE EXISTING 200-FOOT WIDE BUFFER IF DEVELOPED AS NONRESIDENTIAL, IF DEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL, THE

464.35-ACRE POCKET E SOUTHERN BOUNDARY WOULD REDUCE TO 100 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERN PERIMETER, AND REDESIGNATED WITHIN POCKET E, THE 100-FOOT WIDE 50-FOOT BUFFERS TIED TO POCKET E RESIDENTIAL OPTION EXCEEDS AS THE APPLICANT STATED LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION REQUIREMENTS, WHICH NORMALLY WOULD NOT REQUIRE A BUFFER FROM RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY TO RESIDENTIAL. THESE ENHANCEMENTS ESPECIALLY THE WIDE BUFFERS AND THE USE OF THE MEANDERING BUFFER SUPPORT COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES FOUND IN REGARDING THE EPA AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL FOUND IN SECTION 7 OF THE REPORT AS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTOCOLS.

THIS IS THE RADON CORRIDOR. THE RADIOACTIVE PHOSPHATE OR TAILINGS LEFT FROM PHOSPHATE MINING PRESENT A SERIOUS HUMAN HEALTH RISK. RADIO K NUCLIDES EMIT RADIATION FOR A HALF-LIFE OF 1600 YEARS. GAMMA RADIO NUCLIDE PARTICLES ENTER THROUGH BREATHING AND CONTAMINATED TESTS THROUGH WIND AND CONTAMINATED DRINKING WATER. GAMMA RADIATION PARTICLES PASS INTO AND THROUGH THE HUMAN BODY DELIVERING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR CANCER-CAUSING PARTICULATES TO LODGE IN ORGANS. MOVING HUGE AMOUNTS OF SOIL AND GRADING WILL EXACERBATE THE MOVEMENT OF 14 DIOXANE DRIVING IT THURT LATERALLY IMPACTING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF COMMUNITY WELLS AS WELL AS THE HAWTHORNE AQUIFER. EQUALLY CONCERNING IS THE AMOUNT OF RADIOACTIVE DUST THAT WILL BE CREATED 24/7 THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS OF LAND DEVELOPMENT. OUR COMMUNITY WILL CONSISTENTLY BE BREATHING RADIOACTIVE NUCLIDES AND DUST. WE ARE AWARE THERE IS A PROPOSED DUST BARRIER PLAN. WITHOUT THE DETAILS OF THE PLAN, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW IF IT IS COMPREHENSIVE ENOUGH TO MITIGATE AND DRAMATICALLY QUELL THE DUST FROM MOVING OFF PROPERLY. WE DEMAND OUR EXPERT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE DUST BARRIER PLAN AS WELL AS THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. WE RESPECTIVELY ASK THAT THESE THINGS BE GRANTED TO MITIGATE AND ENSURE THE SAFETY OF HUMAN HEALTH. THANK YOU.

HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN. YOU ARE WELCOME TO SUBMIT WHATEVER YOU'D LIKE INTO THE RECORD. NEXT PLEASE, YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU. GEORGE NEIMAN, 4711 DOVER CLIFF COURT, DOVER FLORIDA LIVING NEXT TO GROUND ZERO. THERE'S A LOT TO SAY HERE. I HOPE I CAN MAKE IT IN THE TIME FRAME. AS FAR AS COMPATIBILITY GOES, THIS PROJECT IS NOT REALLY COMPATIBLE AN IT'S DECEIVING THE WAY IT'S PRESENTED. THE ONLY -- ALL OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES HAVE A LOWER DENSITY IN THE NORTH, THE SOUTH AND THE WEST. ACROSS DOVER ROAD YOU HAVE THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING NEARBY THAT IS MIXED USE EITHER, SO THE DENSITY IS A PROBLEM. AS THE FORMER SPEAKER SAID, DIOXANE IS A PROBLEM. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TEST SITES AND THERE SHOULD BE TEST SITES FOR THIS. AND I'M JUST GOING TO PUT TH THIS -- YEAH. IN THAT YELLOW AREA, THERE USED TO BE A COUPLE OF TEST WELLS YEARS AGO. THEY TOOK THEM OUT. BUT THAT YELLOW AREA WAS SETTLING PONDS WITH THE CONTAMINATED WATER. AND REUSED IT AND REUSED IT. AND THERE'S PROBABLY A WHOLE BUNCH OF SOLVENTS, BENZENE, AND, OF COURSE, WITH THE DIOXANE. SO THAT AREA NEEDS FURTHER TESTING. THEY HAVE DONE SOME IMPLEMENT PY TESTING BECAUSE I HAVE HAD SOME CONTACT WITH THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVES. AND THEY HAVE DONE TESTING. THEY TOLD ME THERE WERE TWO PROBLEM AREAS. THEY ARE TESTING FOR RADON AND THEY WON'T GIVE US THE TEST RESULTS. WE THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE THAT YOU LEFT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE

INTERESTED AND HAVE TO LIVE THERE GET SOME OF THE TEST RESULTS BECAUSE, BY THE WAY, I'M LIVING RIGHT NEXT TO THAT MINE. I'VE GOT CANCER. MY WIFE IS A CANCER SURVIVOR. THE NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE ROAD FROM ME JUST PASSED AWAY TWO WEEKS AGO FROM CANCER. THERE'S A LOT OF CANCER IN THAT AREA. IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE EVEN THOUGH THERE'S A LAW THAT'S PENDING WHERE IT WOULD GIVE THE SELLERS OF THIS PROPERTY AND HOMES THAT THEY WOULD JUST HAVE TO PUT IT IN A LISTING. AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH. WE'D LIKE A COMMITMENT THAT THEY WOULD TALK TO EVERY SINGLE POTENTIAL BUYER OF A HOME THERE, SHOULD BE TOLD IT'S A FORMER MINE. I'M GOING TO BE TURNING IN -- BY THE WAY, THEY WANT TO REMOVE THE BERMS. WE THINK THE BERMS ARE A FORM OF STABILITY. AND I'M GOING TO TURN IN A WRITE-UP THAT A PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECT DID WHERE HE SAYS THE BERMS ARE STABLE AND THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH THEM. AND I'M ALSO GOING TO TURN IN EVIDENCE THAT THE COMMUNITY IS OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST IT. WE'VE GOT CLOSE TO A THOUSAND SIGNED PETITIONS. I'M ONLY AWARE OF ONE SINGLE PERSON THAT EVER CAME FORWARD THAT SAID HE LIKED THE PROJECT. BUT THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY IS OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST IT. SO I'M GOING TO TURN IN A SOFT COPY OF THAT. AND I THINK THAT WILL COVER IT FOR ME.

HEARING MASTER: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'LL YIELD MY TIME IF I CAN. HEARING MASTER: IS IT YOUR WIFE THAT'S THE NEXT SPEAKER? GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. EVETTE NEIMAN HERE. I AM GOING TO JUST PUT SOMETHING UP HERE. SO I RESIDE IN DOVER WOODS WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO GROUND ZERO. I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE ONGOING LEJEUNE -- COULD YOU STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE?

4711 DOVER CLIFF COURT, DOVER. THE ONGOING CAMP LEJEUNE LAWSUIT. THERE'S A STRONG PARALLEL IN THAT CASE AND THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NOW BEING PROPOSED AT THE EIP. TOXIC CHEMICALS USED AT SIDNEY PHOSPHATE MINE LIKE BENZENE AND CKEROSENE ARE MOST LIKELY BY SEEPING INTO THE BUILDINGS THAT WILL BE BUILT AT THAT SITE. NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT THE HEALTH RISKS BUT US. NOT THE COUNTY, NOT THE HILLSBOROUGH EPC, AND CERTAINLY NOT THE APPLICANT. PLEASE TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION. I'M PROVIDING A HANDOUT WRITTEN BY THE EPA WHICH DISCUSSES VAPOR INTRUSION. THANK YOU.

HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT PLEASE. GOOD EVENING.

I'M DEBBIE HOLLIDAY. I LIVE AT 2130 MARTIN ROAD. YOU ALREADY HEARD ABOUT THE CANCER CAUSING DIOXANE AND THOSE CHEMICALS FOUND. DIOXANE 14 IS WHEN THE PLUME EXPANDS. IT IS NOT STABLE. IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE SUPERFUND SITE. THEY KEEP REFERENCING THAT, BUT THIS STUFF IS NOT JUST AT THE SUPERFUND SITE. THE NUMBER TWO CAUSE OF LUNG CANCER, RADON GAS IS ALSO ON THE PROPERTY AND TWO MINES WITH THE RADIOACTIVE TAILINGS ARE CONTAINED IN THE BERMS TAKING THESE DOWN CAN CAUSE LEAKAGE NOT ONLY TO THE AIR BUT INTO THE WATER. THE BERMS ALSO PROTECT US FROM FLOODING AND RADIOACTIVE RUNNER WATER FROM THE SITE. MITIGATION SYSTEMS ARE COSTLY AND CAN BE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. RESIDENTS IN THE SURROUNDING AREAS ALREADY HAD TO INSTALL THESE THINGS. I KNOW OF NO PLANS TO TEST THE WATER FOR RADIATION. DIOXAN 1-4 IS THE ONLY TESTED. RUNOFF WATER CARRY TO THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES THAT HAVE WELLS LIKE ME. ALL OF FLORIDA WATER WILL BE CONTAMINATED IF IT GETS INTO THE AQUIFER SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT JUST OUR WELLS. TRAFFIC CONGESTION IS A HUGE CONCERN. WE HAVE FOUR MAIN ROADS, THREE OF WHICH ARE TWO-LANE ROADS, DURANT, DOVER AND TURKEY CREEK HAVE FIVE SCHOOLS WITH FOUR OF THEM BEING ON DURANT ROAD. THERE'S ALSO A HIGH SCHOOL ON TURKEY CREEK AS WELL AND PEOPLE TAKE DURANT UP TO TURKEY CREEK TO GET THERE. AN ADDITIONAL 92 MORE HOMES ARE ALSO APPROVED FOR DEVELOPMENT OFF OF DOVER ROAD AND ON DURANT THERE'S ANOTHER 30 HOMES THAT'S ALSO BEEN APPROVED. MY BIG QUESTION IS HOW WILL EMERGENCY VEHICLES GET THROUGH ALL THIS TRAFFIC.

WE ARE HIGHLY CONGESTED NOW AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURES OVER HERE. THAT'S JUST DURANT ROAD AND THAT'S LIKE A MAIN ROAD FOR US. I HAVE OTHER PICTURES. HEARING MASTER: YOU HAVE A LITTLE LESS THAN A MINUTE.

THAT'S DOVER ROAD AND DURANT. TRAFFIC TRAVELS DOWN DOVER SOUTH TO DURANT AND THEN GOES TO ALL THE SCHOOLS. I HAVE OTHER PICTURES BUT I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE TIME FOR THAT. THE WILDLIFE ALSO WILL BE IN JEOPARDY AS THEY HAVE NO PLACE TO GO. WE'RE TALKING 3,000 ACRES OF HABITAT. I READ THAT THE COMMISSIONERS DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO DENY DEVELOPMENT BASED ON SAFETY CONCERNS. IF IT CONSTITUTES THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE, THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT TO REJECT PROJECTS THAT VIOLATE ENVIRONMENTAL OR SAFETY STANDARDS. I WANT TO KNOW WHY THIS DEVELOPMENT HASN'T BEEN STOPPED. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME. I HAVE ALSO SOME ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION I'LL TURN IN ABOUT CONTAMINATION AND ADDITIONAL PICTURES OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.

HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. HEARING MASTER: DO WE HAVE ONE MORE, I BELIEVE? OR IS THAT IT? WERE YOU THE LAST SPEAKER? OKAY, PERFECT. SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN OPPOSITION, WE'LL GO BACK TO THE COUNTY TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. MS. HEINRICH, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD? NO, MA'AM. HEARING MASTER: THEN WE WILL GO BACK TO MR. CRAMER. YOU HAVE REBUTTAL. I'M WILLING TO ENTERTAIN ADDITIONAL TIME GIVEN THE LENGTH OF THE OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. I THINK MAYBE ONE EXTRA MINUTE BUT WE'LL TRY TO KEEP IT SHORT. FIRST I'D LIKE TO BRING UP THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS PD. HEARING MASTER: ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, KAMI CORBETT FOR THE RECORD WITH HILL WARD HENDERSON. I JUST HAVE SOME DOCUMENTATION THAT BACKS UP THE SCRIVENER'S ERROR ISSUE THAT MR. RATLIFF WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT CONTAINS THE ACTUAL OFFICIAL TRAFFIC REPORT FROM THE PRIOR REZONING. HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. JAKE CRAMER AGAIN, NOW DAVID SMITH THERE ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THE PLANNING CONCERNS.

DAVID SMITH FOR THE RECORD. TO CLARIFY THE CSX QUESTION, AGAIN THAT'S IN THE NON-RESIDENTIAL OPTION. IT IS SHOWN AS TWO CROSSINGS. FDOT IS LOOKING AT THOSE BECAUSE IF YOU ARE CROSSING THE RAILROAD TRACK, THAT TRAFFIC IS SUPPOSED TO GO ALL THE WAY UP FROM THE INDUSTRIAL OPTION TO 60. AND IN THE RESIDENTIAL OPTION, THAT IS NOT -- THOSE CROSSINGS ARE NOT PROPOSED. THEREFORE, ONLY ACCESS TO DOVER ROAD. AND THE STUBOUTS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THAT STAFF HAS REQUESTED THAT WE PUT IN PLACE. AS FAR AS COMPATIBILITY, IT'S CLEAR THAT THE RESIDENTIAL TO OUR SOUTH IS LESS DENSE THAN WE ARE PROPOSING. HOWEVER THE SUBURBAN DENSITIES TO THE WEST ARE CLEARLY RES-4 AND RES-6. THIS DEVELOPMENT AT 2.58 UNITS PER ACRE WHEN ALLOWED TO DEVELOPMENT IT BASED UPON THE CONDITIONS IS WELL UNDERNEATH THE DENSITIES, YOU KNOW, THAT IS ANTICIPATED FOR THE OTHER AREAS AS WELL. THE BERMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY FDEP AS UNSTABLE NEEDING TO COME DOWN. WE ARE REPLACING BERMS ON THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL BUFFER ALONG THAT SOUTHERN AREA WHICH ENHANCES THE COMPATIBILITY IN THE RESIDENTIAL OPTION. I'LL LET MR. CRAMER SPEAK TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. THANK YOU.

HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JAKE CRAMER AGAIN. NOW I'D LIKE TO BRING UP DR. BEMATT WHO IS OUR TOXICOLOGIST WHO HELPED US WORK ON ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE DEVELOPED THOSE. HEARING MASTER: GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS ROBERT DEMOTT, MY ADDRESS IS HIGHLAND MANOR DRIVE IN TAMPA. AND I AM A TOXICOLOGIST AND RISK ASSESSOR, WORKED ON CONTAMINATED LANDS HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY FOR 30 YEARS. I WANTED TO ADDRESS TWO TOPICS, THE SOLVENT PLUME YOU HEARD OF RELATED TO THE SUPERFUND SITE THAT IS APPROXIMATELY A MILE AWAY AND THE POTENTIAL RADON IMPACTS FROM NATURALLY OCCURRING RARADIOACTIVE MATERIALS RELATEDO MINING. WITH REGARD TO THE SOLVENT PLUMES, THE SUPERFUND SITE YOU HAVE HEARD REPEATEDLY IS A DISTANCE AWAY AND WITH REGARD TO THE GROUNDWATER, THE DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER MOVEMENT IS TO THE NORTH AND WEST AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. YOU CAN SEE THE RESIDENTIAL AREA IS IN RED TO THE SOUTH. AND THE SUPERFUND SITE IS FURTHER TO THE NORTH. IMPORTANTLY, EPA HAS VERY ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN REGULATING THE SUPERFUND SITE CLEANUP AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAS BEEN VERY ACTIVE IN REMEDIATING AND ESTABLISHING A NETWORK OF WELLS TO MONITOR AND DETERMINE WHERE THE LIMITS OF THE CONTAMINATION ARE AND THEY ESTABLISHED THE CONTAMINATION REMAINS WELL TO THE NORTH. WITH REGARD TO RADON, THE APPROACH WAS TO MITIGATE EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF TESTING, YET REQUIRE TESTING. IT'S BEEN REFERRED TO AS A THREE-LEGGED STOOL. EVERY HOMESITE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A VAPOR MITIGATION BARRIER WHICH WOULD PREVENT COMING INTO THE HOME. REGARDLESS OF THAT PRESENCE OF THAT BARRIER, A TEST WOULD STILL BE REQUIRED AND A COUNTY WOULD REVIEW AND DETERMINE IT MEETS THE ALLOWABLE LEVELS OF RADON. THAT'S THE SECOND LEG OF THE STOOL. THE THIRD LEG OF THE STOOL DEALS WITH THE LAND THAT'S NOT UNDER THE BUILDINGS. AND IN THAT CASE, THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE FLORIDA

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH EXECUTED A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO TO ADDRESS NATURALLY OCCURRING RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS ON REDEVELOPED PHOSPHATE LAND. AND THAT WILL SERVE AS THE BASIS TO ESTABLISH THAT THERE ARE NO EXPOSURES ABOVE THE BACKGROUND SPECIFICATION. SO WHAT WOULD BE THERE NORMALLY AT THE END OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY AND THE FLORIDA DOH WOULD BE THE REVIEWER OF SETTING THOSE LEVELS. I'D LIKE TO PRESENT THE MEMO OF UNDERSTANDING INTO THE RECORD. HEARING MASTER: PERFECT. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. JAKE CRAMER AGAIN. JUST LIKE TO PLACE A COUPLE OF THINGS IN THE RECORD. ONE IS AN EMAIL THAT I GOT FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATE IN EAST HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, MS. GRETCHEN HOKE. SHE SENT AN EMAIL TO THE BOCC, DIDN'T REALIZE IT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE RECORD AND ASKED ME TO PLACE THIS INTO THE RECORD. SHE KNOWS THAT SHE SUPPORTS THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS THAT ARE BEING OUTLINED IN OUR PD. THE OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO PUT IN THE RECORD IS THIS WAS ALL PROVIDED ELECTRONICALLY BUT IT WAS LATE LAST WEEK, ALL OF OUR EXPERT C.V.'S AND THE MEMORANDUM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXPLAINING DEP'S POSITION ON THE BERM. YOU SEE THE REPORT WHICH ORDERS US TO REMOVE THE BERM BECAUSE OF STABILITY CONCERNS. THEN THE FINAL THING I'D LIKE TO MENTION IS THAT AS HARD AS IT MAY BE TO BELIEVE, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN AT THIS FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW, WE ARE REALLY STILL AT THE BEGINNING OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS HERE. AND WHAT I WANTED TO OUTLINE FOR THE PUBLIC AND FOR YOU IS THAT FROM HERE, WE GO INTO THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS BUT WE'VE GOT THE FULL ALPHABET SOUP OF AT LEAST SIX ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCIES THAT ARE GOING TO BE REVIEWING ALL OF THESE TESTS BEFORE WE CAN EVEN START TURNING DIRT FOR RESIDENTIAL. AND THEN AS YOU'LL SEE IN THE CONDITIONS, WE HAVE COMMITTED TO ADDITIONAL TESTING, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR RADON EVEN AFTER CONSTRUCTION BEFORE THOSE RESIDENCES GET A C.O. SO AGAIN, WE'RE REALLY AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS ENTIRELY PROCESS OF TESTING AND COMPLIANCE. THE LAST THING I'D LIKE TO MENTION, AS MR. NEIMAN DID LET ME REVIEW THE ARCHITECT'S REPORT ON THE BERMS, AND IT LOOKS LIKE UNFORTUNATELY THE ARCHITECT DID NOT REVIEW THE DEP INFORMATION THAT'S IN THE RECORD. SO I DON'T THINK THIS WAS REALLY A SAFETY ANALYSIS. IT WAS MORE OF AN ANALYSIS OF WHETHER BERMS WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. AND THAT'S WHY WE INCLUDED THOSE IN THE CONDITIONS TO BE ABLE TO REBUILD THE BERM SYSTEM. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU.

HEARING MASTER: JUST ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION FOR THE RECORD. THOSE ADDITIONAL TESTING IN THAT PROCESS GRAPHIC YOU JUST PUT UP, ONCE YOU SUBMIT THAT TO THOSE APPLICABLE AGENCIES, THAT THEN BECOMES PUBLIC RECORD THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR ANYBODY TO REVIEW AND SEE WHAT THOSE RESULTS ARE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. MOST AGENCIES HAVE A PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS ALONG THE WAY AS WELL. HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. APPRECIATE IT. THEN WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE MAJOR MODIFICATION 25-0810. IT'S 8:00 SO IT'S TIME FOR OUR FIVE-MINUTE BREAK. AND SO IF YOU COULD BY THE CLOCK BE BACK AT 8:05 AND RESUME THE HEARING.

THANK YOU.

[BREAK]

HEARING MASTER: GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEATS SO WE COULD RESUME THE HEARING. IF EVERYONE COULD TAKE THEIR SEATS PLEASE SO WE COULD RESUME THE HEARING. MS. HEINRICH, I BELIEVE WE ARE READY TO CALL THE NEXT CASE. D-3, MAJOR MOD 25-0849. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO TANYA CHAPEL WILL PRESENT STAFF FINDINGS.

GOOD EVENING, BRIAN ONYX, 201 NORTH TAMPA STREET ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. I HAVE THE CIVIL ENGINEER WITH GULF COAST CONSULTING AND THE PROPERTY OWNERSEN JOINING US THIS EVENING FOR ANY QUESTIONS. WE DO HAVE A BRIEF POWERPOINT IF WE COULD GET THAT DISPLAYED FOR THE HEARING OFFICER. THIS IS MISTY MOON PROPERTIES LLC LOCATED AT 6010 AND 6102 DUNCAN ROAD. THE EXISTING SITE HAS SOME MOBILE HOMES ON IT, ABOUT 12 MOBILE HOMES. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE MULTI-FAMILY IN NATURE TO THE EAST AND SOUTH. AND THEN WE HAVE A GAS STATION TO THE NORTH, RACETRACK GAS STATION. THIS IS PD 06-0491 APPROVED ABOUT 21,000 SQUARE FEET OF PERMITTED USES IN THE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICT INCLUDING 46 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 2,000 SQUARE FEET OF A CHILD DAY CARE USE AND SOME ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL USES, CONVENIENCE STORE, FAST FOOD RESTAURANT, ETC. THOSE USES HAVE NOT BEEN DEVELOPED, BUT THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THAT PD AS AN OPTION. SO WE'RE ADDING A SECOND DEVELOPMENT OPTION IF THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION IS APPROVED. WE WILL NOT BE ELIMINATING THE 2006 PD APPROVAL. WE WILL BE KEEPING IT AS A RETAINED DEVELOPMENT OPTION AND, OF COURSE, THAT PD WAS APPROVED AND WAS FOUND CONSISTENT AT THE TIME BY THE STAFF, MAGISTRATE AND COUNTY COMMISSION. OUR REQUEST, MADAM HEARING OFFICER IS TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM OF 60 MOBILE HOME UNITS ON THE SITE WHERE 12 CURRENTLY EXIST. THESE MOBILE HOME UNITS ARE RENTED OUT PREDOMINANTLY. THEY ARE NOT OWNED. THEY ARE SUBJECT TO THE RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD-TENANT ACT AND NOT SUBJECT TO THE MOBILE HOME ACT FOR WHAT THAT'S WORTH FOR TONIGHT'S HEARING. THE REST OF THE MODIFICATIONS TO

THE PD INVOLVE IMPROVING THE SITE, PROVIDING ADDITIONAL AMENITIES, BRINGING EVERYTHING UP TO CODE FOR STORMWATER. WE HAVE A CONDITION. THIS IS THE CURRENT APPROVED SITE PLAN ON THE BOTTOM THAT WOULD SHOW YOU THOSE CN MULTI-FAMILY DAY CARE CENTER, FAST FOOD RESTAURANT, RETAIL SALES AND SERVICES USES. AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED OPTION B OR 2 BEFORE YOUR HONOR TONIGHT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK OUR CIVIL ENGINEER TO BRIEFLY ADDRESS THIS AND ALSO THE CONDITION FROM TRANSPORTATION RELATED TO CHOKE DEPTH AND HOW WE ARE GOING TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH THAT. HE'S GOING TO ACTUALLY SHOW SOMETHING ON THE OVERHEAD VERY BRIEFLY.

HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN. PRINCIPAL WITH GULF COAST ICOT BOULEVARD CLEARWATER. SO THIS IS THE OPTION B THAT WE HAVE SUBMITTED AND AS YOU CAN SEE THERE WITHIN THE FRONT 45 FEET IS THE SIDE I WANT TO SHOW. I BELIEVE STAFF HAS APPROVED WITH A CONDITION TO CORRECT THAT DEPTH. I WANTED TO SHOW IN OUR PRESENTATION. NOW WE'RE GOING TO THE OVERHEAD, THANK YOU. HEARING MASTER: IF YOU WOULD JUST TURN THAT OVER. THERE YOU GO.

IT'S ON THE OVERHEAD. JUST WANTED TO SHOW THAT INSTEAD OF HAVING THE CONNECTION UP HERE IN THE FRONT WHICH CAUSES THE 4E LOOKING TO POTENTIALLY REROUTE IT AROUND THE LONG WAY THIS WAY. THE THROAT DEPTH IS ACTUALLY THE FULL LENGTH ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK. IF YOU HAD ANY QUESTIONS FURTHER, THAT'S ALL I HAD. HEARING MASTER: NO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU. AND JUST VERY BRIEFLY, MADAM HEARING OFFICER, TO CONCLUDE, WE DO HAVE FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY, WORKED VERY DILIGENTLY WITH THE STAFF OVER MANY MONTHS. AGAIN, AS YOU HAVE HEARD THROUGHOUT THE EVENING ON THE MOBILE HOME PARK AND PARK MODEL CASES THIS IS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION IN AN AREA THAT'S PREDOMINANTLY MULTI-FAMILY SLASH SOME COMMERCIAL WHICH IS THE GAS PLANT DISTRICT TO THE NORTH. WE HAVE PROVIDED COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ACTION AND APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

GOOD EVENING, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO KEEP THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS AS A DEVELOPMENT OPTION AND TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPTION TO ALLOW A 60 SPACE MOBILE HOME PARK. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT TO THE EAST AND SOUTH ACROSS DUNCAN ROAD. THE PROPOSED DENSITY IS UNDER MAXIMUM PERMITTED IN THE CMU-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CATEGORY. THE PROPOSED BUFFERING AND SCREENING EXCEED THE CODE REQUIREMENT. A 20-FOOT WIDE BUFFER TYPE "B" SCREENING IS PROPOSED IN LIEU OF THE 5 FEET WIDE TYPE "A" SCREENING BETWEEN THE SUBJECT SITE AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST AND SOUTH AREAS. FURTHERMORE, THE PROPOSED BUFFER AND SCREENING ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE REQUIREMENTS ALONG THE NORTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY. AND IN ADDITION, THE MOBILE HOME PARK SETBACKS REQUIREMENTS WILL ALSO BE PROVIDED. STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND IN KEEPING WITH THE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. AND THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

HEARING MASTER: THANK YOU SO MUCH. PLANNING COMMISSION.

ALEXIS MYERS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE 12 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY. IT IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE RIVERVIEW COMMUNITY PLAN AS WELL AS THE SOUTHSHORE AREAWIDE SYSTEMS PLAN. THE SUBJECT SITE CONSISTS OF A MOBILE HOME PARK AND MEETS THE INTENT EVER FUTURE LAND USE SUBJECT 1.1 AND POLICY 1.1.3 REGARDING COMPATIBILITY. IT MEETS THE INTENT OF POLICY 4.4.1 THAT REQUIRE NEW REMENTS TO BE COMPATIBLE TO THE ROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AS A SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN COMPRISED MOSTLY OF MIXED USES WITH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE HIGHWAY 301 CORRIDOR DISTRICT NOTED UNDER THE RIVERVIEW COMMUNITY PLAN TO PROVIDE A SAFE, ATTRACTIVE AND EFFICIENT CORRIDOR SYSTEM THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CHARACTER AND ECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDE A SENSE OF ARRIVAL. GOAL ONE OF THE HISTORICAL OBJECTIVE OF SOUTHSHORE AREAWIDE SYSTEMS PLAN SEEKS TO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND CHEMENT WELL PLANNED TO PREVIEW THE AREA'S CULTURAL IDENTITY AND LIVEABILITY. BASED UPON THOSE ABOVE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE FOLLOWING GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FIND THE PROPOSED MAJOR MODIFICATION CONSISTENT WITH THE UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SUBJECT TO THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

HEARING MASTER: ANYONE IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? SEEING NO ONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST? NO ONE. MS. HEINRICH, ANYTHING FURTHER? NO, MA'AM. HEARING MASTER: GO BACK TO THE APPLICANT, SIR? NO, MA'AM. HEARING MASTER: WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE MAJOR MODIFICATION 25-0849. AND GO TO THE NEXT CASE. OUR NEXT APPLICATION IS D4, PD 25-0934. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM AR TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. TIM LAMBKY WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL PROVIDE STAFF FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. HEARING MASTER: GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, THANK YOU, MADAM HEARING OFFICER. JIM PORTER WITH ACREMAN EAST JACKSON STREET TAMPA. WITH ME AS PART OF THE APPLICANT'S TEAM WILL BE MAKING THE PRIMARY PRESENTATION IS TODD PRESSMAN. WE ALSO HAVE SAM WHO IS THE PROJECT ENGINEER. STEVE HENRY OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND ABBIE NAILER. WE WORKED HARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO GET TO THIS POINT TONIGHT FOR THIS HEARING. WE ARE VERY PLEASED THAT WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND A FINDING OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMP PLAN FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I'LL NOTE THAT THERE ARE NO OBJECTION FROM ANY OF THE REVIEWING AGENCIES, NOR ARE WE ASKING FOR ANY VARIANCES. AS YOU CONSIDER THIS APPLICATION, WE'RE GOING TO ASK YOU TO SPECIFICALLY FOCUS ON SEVERAL THINGS THAT WE FEEL ARE VERY IMPORTANT. ONE, WE ARE INTO THE PROPOSING IMPACTS TO THE WETLANDS ON SITE. THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 182 WETLANDS ON SITE AND NO PROPOSALS TO IMPACT ANY OF THOSE. THE OTHER PIECE THAT BETHINK IS VERY IMPORTANT IS OUR DISTANCE FROM THE INTERCHANGE OF THE SUNCOAST EXPRESSWAY. WE ARE APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET AWAY FROM THAT WHICH IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF THIS APPLICATION. WE ARE ALSO AN AGRICULTURAL ENCLAVE UNDER FLORIDA STATUTES. I'M GOING TO BE SUBMITTING INTO THE RECORD THREE LEGAL MEMORANDUM, ONE WRITTEN BY ME, ONE WRITTEN BY DOM HEMKY AND ANOTHER FROM BUSCH ROSS THAT BOLSTER THIS IS AN AGRICULTURAL ENCLAVE. WE WILL BE MAKING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND TO THAT END WE CAN TO THE GREATEST EXTENT ALLOWABLE BY LAW THAT IMPACT FEES PAID FOR THIS PROJECT BE APPLIED TO THIS IMMEDIATE AREA. I'LL NOTE FINALLY BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO MR. PRESSMAN THAT THE VAST MAORITY OF THIS SITE WILL NOT BE DEVELOPED. THE INTENT IS TO CLUSTER EITHER THE RESIDENTIALS OR THE -- RESIDENTIAL USES OR THE RVs IF THAT'S THE OPTION THAT'S CHOSEN. WITH THAT T. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. PRESSMAN AND RESERVE TIME

FOR REBUTTAL. AND I'LL BE PRESENTING THIS INTO THE RECORD. THANK YOU. HEARING MASTER: GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU, HEARING OFFICER. TODD PRESSMAN, 20 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH NUMBER 451, ST. PETERSBURG. I AM, AS WELL, WORKING WITH JIM AND THE TEAM HERE AS AGENTS FOR MR. STEVEN DIBBS. TO MENTION THERE ARE TWO COMPANION FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENTS TO MOVE THE U.S.A. AND CHANGE THE DENSITIES. PLANNING COMMISSION IS CONSISTENT, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SUPPORTS. TRANSPORTATION NO OBJECTION AND MEETS LOCATIONAL CRITERIA WITH NO VARIATIONS. PROPOSED REZONING IS FROM AR TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR 392 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES FOR 392 RV PARK UNITS. AND 9.22 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL USES. LOCATED IN THE KEYSTONE ODESSA AREA, YOU SEE IT'S ONE SIDE, ABOUT 500 FEET AS MENTIONED FROM THE VETERANS EXPRESSWAY AND RUNNING ALONG LUTZ LAKE FERN ROAD. THIS IS THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION. YOU'LL NOTE THAT MAJOR WATER FEATURE HELPS ORIENT THE SITE. LOOKING AT THE PD PLAN AS PRESENTED, AGAIN WITH THE WATER FEATURE, AS JIM INDICATED THERE'S LIMITED DEVELOPMENT ONLY IN THAT GENERAL AREA WHICH WILL GET MORE DETAILED. NO DEVELOPMENT AND THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE SITE AND COMMERCIAL PROPOSED ON LUTZ LAKE FERN. SO THE DEVELOPMENT AREA, NOT INCLUDING THAT WATER FEATURE AREA IS ABOUT 30%. THE AREA NOT TO BE DEVELOPED IS ABOUT 70% MOL. WE ARE PRESENTING THAT BECAUSE WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN OVERALL VIEW OF THE LIMITATIONS OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE ENTIRE AREA. LOOKING AT 392 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, THAT WOULD BE A VERY IMPORTANT STATISTIC WHICH WOULD BE A 1.38 GROSS UNIT PER ACRE DENSITY. THAT'S A LOW DENSITY. 1.38 GROSS UNITS PER ACRE.

NOW, INCLUDED WITH THIS, OF COURSE -- BECAUSE A LOT OF IT IS UNDEVELOPED -- IS THIS TREMENDOUS AREA OF BUFFER AND SCREENING. YOU CAN START TO GET THE FEEL FOR THE AREA LOOKING AT GREEN, VERY DENSE, VERY THICK FORESTATION AND WETLANDS AS WELL AS BERMS THROUGHOUT THE SITE. AERIAL VIEW LOOKING TOWARDS LUTZ LAKE FERN ROAD, YOU CAN SEE THE DEPTH OF FORESTATION WHICH WOULD BE SCREENING AND BUFFERING TO THE SOUTHEAST AND THE WEST. THIS IS LOOKING EAST. YOU CAN SEE THE HOUSE ON THE WEST, CAN'T SEE INTO THE PROPERTY. THERE IS A LARGE BERM THERE AS WELL. YOU CAN SEE THE FORESTATION WHERE DEVELOPMENT WILL OCCUR ALONG THE WATER FEATURE. YOU SEE IVY LAKE ESTATES THAT ABUTS IN PASCO AND TERRAMORE WHICH IS TO THE EAST. AGAIN TO GIVE YOU THE IDEA OF THE BERMING AND FORESTATION TO THE NORTH. ON THE GROUND, YOU CAN SEE THE BERMING AND FORESTATION. AND FOR REFERENCE, YOU CAN SEE THERE WAS A COW ON PROPERTY THAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE YELLOW TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE DEPTH AND INTENSITY OF THAT. THIS WILL BE THE CURRENT SITE WHERE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CLUSTERED AROUND THE WATER FEATURE. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, WHICH I THINK IS IMPORTANT, NOTES THE EXISTING FORESTATION ALONG THE ENTIRE -- NOT JUST ONE SIDE, BUT THE ENTIRE WESTERN NORTHERN EASTERN BOUNDARIES WILL BE PRESERVED PROVIDING SIGNIFICANT BUFFERING AND SCREENING FROM ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES ASSOCIATED WITH GROWTH IN THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS. AND, OF COURSE, AS INDICATED, THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE CLUSTERED INTO THE AREAS THAT ARE DESIGNATED FOR DEVELOPMENT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE KEYSTONE ODESSA LOT ACREAGES THROUGHOUT THE AREA, YOU CAN SEE A WIDE VARIATION TO LARGE TO SMALL ACRES AS YOU SEE COLOR CODED. WITH REGARD TO SEPTICS AND WELLS, YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A

VARIATION OF SEPTICS AND WELLS AND PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER. AND LOOKING AT THE EXISTING LANDS USES MAP, WHAT WOULD BE SINGLE-FAMILY IS YELLOW PRETTY PRONOUNCED IN TERMS OF SINGLE-FAMILY AND THE SITE IS SHOWED THERE AS AGRICULTURAL. LOOKING AT CURRENT DEVELOPMENT, CURRENT DEVELOPMENT SURROUNDING TO THE NORTH, THE BORDER IS PASCO COUNTY. AT THAT SIDE OF PASCO COUNTY IS THREE AND FOUR UNITS PER ACRE WITH WATER AND SEWER. TO THE EAST IS 243 HOMES AT TERRAMORE WITH WATER AND SEWER. AND TO THE SOUTH IS 81 HOMES, SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND 78 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ALL WITH WATER AND SEWER SURROUNDING THE SITE ON THE THREE SIDES. SO THAT'S THREE TO FOUR UNITS TO THE NORTH, WE HAVE IT AS 4.3 UNITS TO THE EAST, WE HAVE IT AS 6.2 UNITS ON THE SOUTH SURROUNDING THE SITE ON THREE SIDES. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT AS COMPARISON FROM THE LEFT WHICH IS TODAY'S SITE AT 1.38 UNITS PER ACRE, IT'S THE VERY LOWEST RUNNING ALL THE WAY UP TO THE AREA AT 6.2 UNITS PER ACRE PER OUR MATH. LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT DEVELOPMENT, THIS IS THE PROJECT SITE AT THE COUNTY LINE. RIGHT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COUNTY LINE IS THE THREE TO FOUR UNITS PER ACRE EXISTING. AND THE PROJECT SITE ON THE GROUND HERE IS LOCATED ON THE RIGHT. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE A WALL AND THERE'S BERMING IN FRONT OF THAT. PASCO HOMES IN THE NORTH ARE LITERALLY LESS THAN A STONE THROW ACROSS THAT PROPERTY LINE FROM THE PROPERTY. AGAIN, TO GIVE YOU THAT SPATIAL FEEL. THESE ARE THE HOMES ON THE SOUTH, YOU CAN SEE AGAIN THE SUBURBAN INTENSITY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND THIS IS TERRAMORE HOMES TO THE EAST AS WELL. YOU CAN SEE THE SUBSTANTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN ALSO THERE'S A MONT REUX SUBSTANTIAL ON THE EAST OF LUTZ LAKE FERN ROAD TO THE WEST. MR. BPLANNING COMMISSION NOTES T

THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS CONSISTENT AND STRATEGIC LOCATION IS DESIGNED TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY. DEVELOPMENT IS BUFFERED FROM ADJACENT USES BY SUBSTANTIAL WETLANDS. IN ADDITION, EXISTING FORESTATION -- I'LL READ THIS AGAIN BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT STATEMENT. ALONG THE ENTIRE WESTERN, NORTHERN AND EASTERN BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTIES WILL BE PRESERVED PROVIDING INTERNET SIT BUFFERING AND SCREEN FROM THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ZONING NOTES THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA. AND THEY NOTE THAT A SMALL COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS PROPOSED IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER WHICH WILL ALLOW LIMITED COMMERCIAL IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PD. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS AND NOTES THAT THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS INTEGRATED WITH A LARGER MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT SATISFIES THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA OF FUTURE LAND USE POLICY 4.7.3 WHICH IS COMMERCIAL LOCATIONAL CRITERIA. ANOTHER IMPORTANT TO MENTION HERE IS WATER, SEWER AND URBAN SERVICE AREA. NOW, TO THE SOUTH URBAN SERVICE AREA EXISTS. TO THE EAST, IT'S APPROXIMATELY 500 TO 600 FEET OR SO TO THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. AND ABUTTING TO THE NORTH PASCO COUNTY HAS WATER AND SEWER. BUT MORE THAN THAT, IT'S A REGIONAL WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM THAT RUNS THROUGH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, THROUGH THE PROPOSED SITE, KNOWN AND EXPANDS INTO PASCO. WE WOULD BE PART OF A NATURAL EXISTING U.S.A. CORRIDOR PROVIDING WATER AND SEWER. WATER QUALITY AND QUALITY GOALS, WETLANDS, OPEN SPACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL WILDLIFE OF THE NATURAL SYSTEMS OF THE KEYSTONE ODESSA PLAN IS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF THAT PLAN. AND TAKING THIS SITE OFF OF WATER -- EXCUSE ME, WELL AND SEPTIC WOULD ALIGN WITH MANY OF THE KEYSTONE COMMUNITY PLAN GOALS. BECAUSE SEPTIC TANKS LEECH INTO

THE GROUND. I WILL TELL YOU, HEARING OFFICER, AS A FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE SWFWMD GOVERNING BOARD, THAT AGENCY, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, CITY OF TAMPA SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WITH PROGRAMS TO TAKE RESIDENTIAL USES FROM WATER AND SEWER -- EXCUSE ME, FROM WELLS AND SEPTIC TO PUT THEM IN WATER AND SEWER SO WE DON'T HAVE STRAWS IN THE GROUND, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF STRAWS IN THE GROUND DRAWING WATER OUT OF THE AQUIFER AND LITTLE PIPES IN THE GROUND GOING TO SEPTIC TANKS THAT LEECH AND ARE CREATING TREMENDOUS POLLUTION PROBLEMS IN OUR GROUNDWATER AND WATER SYSTEM. LOOKING, AS JIM INDICATED, THE DISTANCE TO THE VETERANS RAMP IS ABOUT 500 FEET MOL WHICH CONNECTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS FROM CITRUS COUNTY, CITY OF TAMPA, FOR ENTERTAINMENT AND THE AIRPORT. VETERANS CARRY VEHICLES TODAY AND WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY WIDENED THROUGH PASCO AND CITRUS COUNTY. AND THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POLICY RECOGNIZING INTENSITY WITHIN 66T NATURE. LUTZ LAKE FERN IS A COUNTY ARTERIAL ROADWAY ON THE CLASSIFICATION AND CARRIES APPROXIMATELY 7900 VEHICLES PER DAY. BUT IN 2012, $12.5 BILLION WAS SPENT ON THE INTERCHANGE OF VETERANS EXPRESSWAY TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE GROWTH. AND AT THAT TIME, THE CIVIC GROUP SUPPORTED IT. HERE WE ARE LOOKING AT FUTURE GROWTH THAT WILL SPECIFICALLY USE THAT INTERCHANGE THAT WE SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. WE NEED TO USE IT. WE SUBMITTED A NUMBER OF TRAFFIC REPORTS THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE PROCESS. STEVE HENRY IS HERE. AND THOSE REPORTS ARE IN THE RECORD. ANY QUESTIONS, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT UNDER THE BUREAU OF ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS RESEARCH, BY 2050, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WILL WELCOME MORE NEW RESIDENTS THAN THE

TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTS LIVING IN THE CITY OF TAMPA IN 2024. SO WE ARE EXPECTING STREAMS GROWTH. THIS IS A GREAT AREA FOR GROWTH. THE ROADWAYS ARE ESTABLISHED. VETERANS IS ESTABLISHED. WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF PUBLIC MONEY TO IMPROVE THOSE ROADWAYS. BY 2050 AGAIN UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WILL HAVE A 39% MORE RESIDENTS AND 43% MORE JOBS. BUT LOOKING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE ODESSA KEYSTONE COMMUNITY PLAN, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS DETERMINED IT DOES SUPPORT THE VISION OF THE KEYSTONE ODESSA COMMUNITY PLAN AND THEY NOTE THAT THE SITE DESIGN AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATE MANY OF THE STANDARDS THAT ARE WITHIN THE RURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES AND WOULD ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN. WE DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT SITE IS IN THE X FLOOD ZONE AND WE DO HAVE AN ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY BY MR. BUCHMAN I'LL PUT IN THE RECORD THAT SHOWS TOTAL REVENUE TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WILL BE ALMOST 13 MILLION AND RECURRING REVENUE FOR THE PROJECT WILL BE ABOUT $4,326,000 A YEAR. THE COMP PLAN APPLIES IN MOST AREAS TO PROVIDE HOUSING AND MAKE SURE THERE'S ADEQUATE HOUSING FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE HAD A REPORT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE BUDDING DEVELOPMENT IN PASCO AN TO PRESERVE SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS AND APPROPRIATELY CONSIDER THE VALUE OF THE LAND. TREMENDOUS NATURAL BUFFERING AND SCREENING, IT'S LOCATED AT THE BORDER OF THE DISTRICT.

WATER IS ABUTTING, WASTEWATER IS AVAILABLE NEARBY. WE FEEL THAT THIS PROPERTY IS AN ENCLAVE LEFTOVER THAT DOESN'T COMPARE REALLY TO ANYTHING ELSE IN THE ENTIRE KEYSTONE ODESSA AREA. WITH THAT HEARING OFFICER, WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION, AND WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. CHAIR: JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. YOU MADE REFERENCE TO THE 500 FOOT DISTANCE FROM THE INTERCHANGE. THAT IS TO THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL AREA, IS THAT CORRECT?

I HAVE A GRAPHIC HERE, IF WE CAN PULL THAT BACK UP. AND SAM WILL COME UP. SAM HAS DONE A GREAT JOB HERE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ANSWER A QUESTION? THANK YOU. I'M SAM SABOLY. THE 500 FEET IS TO THE EAST BOUNDARY, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY WHERE THE COMMERCIAL IS BEING PLANNED. SO IT IS CLOSE TO THE COMMERCIAL.

CHAIR: THANK YOU. MR. PRESSMAN? SIR, IF YOU CAN SIGN IN PLEASE. MR. PRESSMAN, THERE'S AN RV PARK COMPONENT. THERE'S A TREMENDOUS NUMBER OF LETTERS IN OPPOSITION FOR THIS. A LOT OF THEM SITE THE SAME CONCERNS, THEY TALK ABOUT DENSITY, THE WATER/SEWER. YOU ARE CONNECTING TO PUBLIC WATER SEWER, CORRECT? YES, ONE OF THE COMP AMENDMENTS BRINGS US INTO THE USA. WITH THAT, COMP PLAN AMENDMENT? YES, MA'AM.

CHAIR: MR. PORTER ALREADY ENSURED THERE ARE NO IMPACTS. THEY TOOK AOUT TRAFFIC ON MOOSE LAKE FERN. ONE QUESTION I HAD, THE PLANNING COMMISSION TALKS ABOUT 120 DAY LIMITATION ON HOW LONG YOU CAN STAY IN THAT SITE. BUT I DON'T SEE THAT IN THE CONDITIONS, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU PROPOSE? THAT HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED WITH STAFF, IF IT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT US TO CONSIDER, I'LL BE HAPPY TO CONSIDER IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. FOR NOW, I BELIEVE THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. CHAIR: WE'LL GO TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

GOOD EVENING. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. WE HAVE A REVISED REPORT THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR TRANSPORTATION AND I'LL READ THAT INTO THE RECORD, SINCE IT CAME VERY LATE. IT'S CONDITION NO. 2A, AND THE ADDITION IS AFTER BERRY ACRES TRAIL PERIOD, THE CONSTRUCTION WILL BEGIN AT LUTZ FERN LAKE ROAD, THE DEVELOPER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTING THE REQUIRED TRAFFIC SIGNAL. AND THAT'S -- THAT WAS A SUBSTANCE OF THEIR CHANGES. THERE WERE SOME OTHER PRIOR TO SITE PLAN CERTIFICATION CHANGES, THAT WERE ADDED IN THE OVERALL STAFF REPORT AND WITH THAT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THAT'S THE 120 DAYS. IT COMES FROM LDC SECTION 6.11.110. AND THAT'S RECREATIONAL VEHICLES. AND IT'S THE DURATION OF VEICLE SITES FOR RV PARK SHALL BE RENTED FOR THE DAY OR WEEK, BUT IN NO CASE, IT ENDS, EXCEEDING 120 CALENDAR DAYS WITHIN ANY 360 DAY PERIOD, WHETHER ACCUMULATED, CONSECUTIVELY, OR INTERMITTENTLY.

MR. LAMPKIN, WOULD THIS PROJECT BE SUBJECT TO THAT CODE REQUIREMENT? THAT IS CORRECT. CHAIR: THANK YOU.

AND WITH THAT THE APPLICANT SEEKS TO DEVELOP APPROXIMATELY 316 ACRE PROPERTY, THE EASTERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET WEST OF THE SUNCOAST PARKWAY OFFRAMP TO LUTZ LAKE FERN ROAD. THE SITE CURRENTLY HAS THE USE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS STATED WILL BE TERMEN ATED IF THE PROPOSED PD IS APPROVED. LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE PERIMETER, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PD'S SURROUNDING IT, PREDOMINANTLY, THAT ONE IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. DEVELOPED AT RSC4 STANDARDS WITH, UP TO 243 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, SIMILAR TO THE PROPOSED OPTION 1, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. STAFF DOES NOTE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS LIMITED TO A 30 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT. THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE EAST DOES ALLOW UP TO 25,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD USES, ACCESSED INTERNALLY, DUE NORTH OF LAKE FERN ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF SUNCOAST PARKWAY, AND ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. TO THE SOUTH AS THE APPLICANT STATED IT'S DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND A GOLF COURSE. AND SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED LOTS, IT'S BROKEN DOWN IN VILLAGES, 1, 3, 4, 9 ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH RSC SIX STANDARDS AND RSC9 ZONING STANDARDS, WHICH ARE IN VILLAGE 2. AND THAT ONE ALLOWS 869 DWELLING UNITS. IN THAT ONE, THE HEIGHTS MAY NOT EXCEED 35 FEET. THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE

AREAS, THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADJACENT LAND USES ARE PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL. A SMALL COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS PROPOSED ON THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE. LIMITED TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL USES ADJACENT TO THE PD, WHICH ALSO, AS I JUST STATED, ALLOWS UNLIMITED COMMERCIAL IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THAT PD, JUST NORTH OF LAKE FERN ROAD. IF DEVELOPED AS AN RV PARK, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A 25 FOOT BUFFER WITH TYPE B SCREENING, THE PERIMETER OF THE PARK ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THE APPLICANT'S NOT REQUESTED ANY VARIATION FROM THE SITE PLAN, INCLUDING PART 6.0500 OR 6.077. THERE'S ALSO A PENDING HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMP PLAN AMENDMENT, 25-03 TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE TO RESIDENTIAL 4 AND ANOTHER CONCURRENT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, 25-04 TO EXPAND THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY, AND WITH THAT, STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST APPROVABLE, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND PURSUANT TO APPROVAL OF THE PENDING COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND THAT INCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION UNLESS YOU HAD ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?

NO QUESTIONS.

ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THIS IS CONSIDERED APPROVABLE TO GO FROM AGRICULTURE 105 TO RESIDENTIAL 24. TO EXPAND THE URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY. ACCORDINGLY, THE PROPOSED PD WILL BE EVALUATED AND ANALYZED BASED ON THE RES 4 DESIGNATION. THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES 392 UNITS COMPARED TO THE MAXIMUM POTENTIAL OF 500 UNITS AND OVERALL DENSITY OF 1.35 ACRES -- OF UNITS PER GROSS ACRE, IT MEETS THE INTENT OF FUTURE LAND USE SECTION OF OBJECTIVE 2.2 AND ITS ASSOCIATED POLICIES. THOSE SURROUNDING AREAS ARE DESIGNATED AT LOWER DENSITIES. THERE ARE ADEQUATE TRANSITION OF USES PROVIDED WITH MEASURES, THE DEVELOPMENT IS BUFFERED FROM ADJACENT USES, BY SUBSTANTIAL WETLAND AREAS, AND THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS TO BE CLUSTERED. NATURAL FORESTATION OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE PRESERVED, PROVIDING SIGNIFICANT BUFFERING AND SCREENING FROM ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES. THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, INCLUDED A CONDITION OF THE SITE. THAT REQUIRES A 30 FOOT WETLAND BUFFER, AS PART OF THE SITE'S LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING MEASURES. POLICY 4.7.3, REQUIRES A COMMERCIAL CRITERIA, MAY -- ONE SUCH CRITERION ALLOWS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD USES, THAT ARE INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED AS PART OF THE LARGER MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPOSED PD HAS A MIX OF USES AND PROVIDES CONNECTIVITY TO THE NORTHERN RESIDENTIAL AREA, VIA THE BERRY ACRES TRAIL, WITHIN THE SITE.

THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS INTEGRATED WITHIN LARGER MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, THE CRITERIA OF POLICY 4.7.3. WHILE THE KEYSTONE ODESSA COMMUNITY SEEKS TO MAINTAIN A RURAL PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT, THE SUBJECT SITE IS BEING EVALUATED UNDER THE CONCURRENT URBAN SERVICE AREA EXPANSION AND RESIDENTIAL COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT REQUEST, AND ANALYZED AS THOSE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED. BASED UPON THOSE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE FOLLOWING GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDS THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

CHAIR: MISS MYERS, LET ME -- THE APPLICATION IS DEPENDENT ON THOSE TWO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS. TO EXPAND THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. WHERE DO THEY STAND? I BELIEVE THEY WENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. LET ME -- I WANTED TO SEE WHEN IT'S GOING TO THE BOARD. I APOLOGIZE, I SHOULD HAVE HAD THOSE PULLED UP.

CHAIR: WE CAN COME BACK. WE'LL CALL FOR ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT. ANYONE IN FAVOR THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NO ONE, HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION. IF YOU HOLD YOUR HANDS UP. MADAM CHAIR, WE HAVE ONE ON LINE AS WELL. CHAIR: I'M SORRY, HOW MANY ON LINE? JUST ONE.

GOOD EVENING, WE HAVE A PRESENTATION WITH A NUMBER OF US, THAT WOULD BE FOR 1 MINUTES. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S TIME FOR THAT, IT INCLUDES MYSELF, ETHEL HAMMER, WHO IS A NEIGHBOR AND LAND USE PLANNER, AND REPRESENTATIVES FROM TERRA MOORE IVY LAKE ESTATES, KEYSTONE ASSOCIATION, BETH WHITE AND WE PLANNED THIS OUT FOR 15 MINUTES.

CHAIR: THAT'S TERRIFIC. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE BESIDES YOUR GROUP THAT ALSO WANTS TO SPEAK? MA'AM, IF YOU COULD STEP OUT OF THE WAY FOR A SECOND SOY CAN SEE THE HANDS IN THE AUDIENCE. RAISE YOUR HANDS IF YOU'RE NOT PART OF THAT GROUP AND YOU WANT TO SPEAK. I SEE THREE. I'LL ALLOW YOU 15 MINUTES FOR YOUR COORDINATED PRESENTATION, AND THE THREE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, IF I COULD JUST LIMIT YOU TO A MINUTE A PIECE TO ADD ON TO THEIR PRESENTATION. IF YOU FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE COMMENTED AND MADE YOUR POINTS THAT YOU WANTED TO MAKE, IT WOULD BE SIMPLER TO PUT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THE RECORD, THAT IS EVEN BETTER, YOU'D LIKE TO HANDLE IT THAT WAY. ALISON, LET'S DO 15 MINUTES FOR HER GROUP, WHICH CONSISTS OF HOW MANY PEOPLE. OKAY, THERE'S SIX.

CHAIR: OKAY, FOR THOSE SIX, WE'LL DO 15 MINUTES, AND THEN A MINUTE A PIECE.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS JANE GRAHAM. I REPRESENT THE KEYSTONE CIVIC ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS AN ASSOCIATION FORMED FOR CIVIC IMPROVEMENT AND PROMOTION OF THE INTEREST, WELFARES AND IDEALS OF THE KEYSTONE COMMUNITY. YOU HAVE RECEIVED OVER 500 LETTERS IN OPPOSITION, AND MANY ARE HERE TONIGHT, I'D LIKE TO SAY, IF YOU ARE IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE STAND. CASE LAW SAYS, PLEASE DON'T CLAB. REZONING IS NOT A POPULARITY CONTEST, THE CONTENT DOES SPEAK TO THE GROSS COMPATIBILITY OF THIS PROPOSAL WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. AS A THRESHOLD MATTER, THIS APPLICATION IS CONTINGENT ON THE TWO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS. ONE WHICH PROPOSES TO CHANGE THE LAND USE FROM AGRICULTURAL RURAL, WHICH HAS A DENSITY TO R4, A MUCH DENSER CATEGORY. THE OTHER PROPOSES TO EXPAND THE AREA 295 ACRES OF IT, INTO THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO FIND BOTH AMENDMENTS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SIGHTING COMPATIBILITY, POLICIES RELATING TO RURAL AREAS, AGRICULTURE, NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT, AND A LIVABLE COMMUNITIES, KEYSTONE/ODESSA PLAN. I HAVE A COPY OF BOTH OF THOSE RIZ LUCIENS, I'M GOING TO PUT IN THE RECORD FOR YOU. IN THE MATERIALS, THE APPLICANT COMPLAINS THE KEYSTONE/ODESSA PLAN IS OUT OF DATE AND NOT BINDING. THIS IS WRONG. I'M INCLUDING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COPY IN THE RECORD AS WELL. THIS HAS BEEN CHALLENGED IN FEDERAL COURT OVER 10 YEARS AGO, AND THE DISTRICT COURT, THE MIDDLE DISTRICT AND THE 11th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UPHELD THE KEYSTONE PLAN, STATING THAT THE KEYSTONE ODESSA PLAN WAS

DEVELOPED TO GUIDE DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPERS WHO ARE CONSIDERING BUYING LAND IN THE AREA. NOT EVERYONE IN THE AREA MAY AGREE WITH THE DECISIONS MADE, THESE ARE POLITICAL ISSUES NOT CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES. MISS HAMMER WILL PROVIDE MORE DETAILED TESTIMONY ON THE CURRENT APPLICATIONS AND CONSISTENCIES, I AM PROVIDING FOR THE RECORD A PACKAGE OF EVIDENCE THAT INCLUDES MAPS, FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, GOOGLE EARTH AND HILLSBOROUGH GIS, WHICH SHOW A LAND USE PATTERN, WHICH WAS OMITTED JUST NOW IN THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION THAT SHOWS LARGE LOT SIZES DIRECTLY TO THE WEST OF THE PROPOSED SITE. MANY WELL OVER FIVE ACRES AND IN STARK CONTRAST TO THE PROPOSED 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS, WHICH IS A 20 FOLD DECREASE IN SIZE. I'VE ALSO NOTIFIED STAFF OF THE PROCEDURAL DEFICIENCIES OF THESE PLANS, BECAUSE IT INCLUDES 2 DIFFERENT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT SITE PLANS, ONE WITH THE RV PARK, AND ONE WITH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO TREAT THEM TOGETHER AT THE SAME TIME. STAFF NOTED IN THEIR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS THAT IT ALSO LACKED THE WORST CASE SCENARIO, AND PEAK TRIP ANALYSIS I WOULD OBJECT FOR THE RECORD, AS TO ANY NEW INFORMATION ABOUT THE SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS NEEDED, AND SAY WE WOULD BE ABLE TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IF THIS COMES UP AGAIN. FINALLY, THE PROPOSED 100,000 PLUS SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL STICKS OUT IN THE RESIDENTIAL AND AGRICULTURAL AREA, IT IS NOT JUST A SMALL COMMERCIAL AREA. THE KEYSTONE PLAN SPEAKS TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTER, BY MOBLEY AND GUNN HIGHWAY. I'M INCLUDING INFORMATION IN THE

STRIP CENTER, THAT'S AROUND - 30,000 SQUARE FEET AT THAT COMMERCIAL AREA FOR KEYSTONE. THE OTHER THING YOU SHOULD KNOW IS, THERE'S SED WORLD, WHICH IS A PLANT NURSERY, WHICH IS ON LUTZ LAKE FERN AND THAT'S LIKE 16,000 SQUARE FEET. TO HAVE 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL REALLY STICKS OUT, IT IS TOTALLY INCOMPATIBLE. I WANT T YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME FOR THESE REASONS, THERE'S A FAILURE TO SUPPORT WITH COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. I HAVE PACKETS OF EVIDENCE I'D LIKE TO PUT IN THE RECORD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CHAIR: THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS ETHEL HAMMER, MY ADDRESS IS 19825 ANGEL LANE ODESSA. I AM ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, I AM HERE AS AN AFFECTED HOMEOWNER AND A LAND USE PLANNER WITH OVER 40 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. THE FIRST ASPECT RELATES TO THE CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMP PLAN. TIME IS NOT GOING TO BE -- PERMIT ME TO DISCUSS ALL THE RELEVANT POLICIES, SO I'M GOING TO DISCUSS JUST SEVERAL OF THE CRITICAL PORTIONS OF THE COMP PLAN AND ENTER THE REST OF MY OPINION INTO THE RECORD. FIRST, THE APPLICANT DID NOT REQUEST AN AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE PROPERTY FROM THE KEYSTONE ODESSA COMMUNITY PLAN. THEREFORE, THE PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THOSE REGULATIONS. THE KEYSTONE PLAN SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS TO BE MAINTAINED AT LOW DENSITY LEVELS WITH A MINIMUM OF ONE UNIT PER FIVE ACRES. BOTH USES, EITHER SMALL LOTS, LESS THAN A QUARTER ACRE, OR AN RV PARK ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE KEYSTONE PLAN TO MAINTAIN AN AGRICULTURAL LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE APPLICATION DOES NOT MEET LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT WAS CONFIRMED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE BULK OF THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL LIES OUTSIDE OF THE SUNCOAST PARKWAY, AND LUTZ LAKE FERN NODE. THEREFORE, STAFF ATTEMPTED TO BASE THEIR RECOMMENDATION ON AN EXCEPTION CLAUSE. BUT THIS APPLICATION DOESN'T MEET THAT EXCEPTION CLAUSE EITHER.

THE EXCEPTION CLAUSE IN QUESTION IS WITHIN POLICY 4.7.3, WHICH PERMITS COMMERCIAL IF IT IS INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED AS PART OF A LARGER MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST 10 ACRES IN SIZE. ALTHOUGH IT IS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER 10 ACRES IN SIZE, IT DOES NOT MEET THE MOST IMPORTANT PART AND CRITICAL LANGUAGE OF THAT EXCEPTION CLAUSE. IT IS NOT INTEGRATED, NOR IS IT CONNECTED TO THE REMAINDER OF THE PD PROJECT. IN FACT, IT IS PHYSICALLY SEPARATED BY A LARGE CONSERVATION AREA. PATRONS OF THE RETAIL ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GET OUT ON TO LUTZ LAKE FERN ROAD TO EVEN ACCESS THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE PROJECT. SO CLEARLY, IT IS NOT INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED. URBAN -- WITH RESPECT TO THE RV PARK, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR RV PARK, WHICH ARE -- THEY WERE REFERENCED EARLIER, ACTUALLY, IT'S ARTICLE 4 SECTION 6.11.110. THE VERY FIRST REQUIREMENT IN THIS SECTION IS THAT AN RV PARK, AND I QUOTE, SHALL HAVE IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO A COLLECTOR OR ARTERIAL STREET. WITH NO ENTRANCE OR EXITS ON TO LOCAL ROADS. BARRY ACRES TRAIL IS NOT A COLLECTOR OR ARTERIAL, IT'S A DEADEND LOCAL STREET PROVIDING ACCESS TO FEWER THAN 10 PROPERTIES. IT HAS SUBSTANDARD PAVEMENT IN SOME AREAS AND DIRT IN OTHER AREAS. IT IS ONLY 15 TO 20 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY, NOT MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY. BARRY ACRES TRAIL, DOES NOT MEET

THE DEFINITION OF A COLLECTOR ROAD, IT DOES NOT COLLECT IN ANYWHERE, AS IT'S A DEADEND LOCAL STREET. STAFF MADE THE INCORRECT CONCLUSION THAT IT MEETS THAT CRITERION BY SUGGESTING THAT IF THE APPLICANT DEDICATED ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY TO WIDEN THE SMALL SECTION OF BERRY ACRES TRAIL, ADJACENT TO THEIR PROJECT DRIVEWAY, AND TO PAVE THAT SMALL SECTION TO COLLECTOR STANDARDS, SOMEHOW THAT ENTIRE ROAD WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BECOME A COLLECTOR. THIS ATTEMPT TO CIRCUMVENT THE CODE REQUIREMENT COMPLETELY UNDERMINES LOCATIONAL CRITERIA. THIS IN NO WAY MAKES BERRY ACRES TRAIL A COLLECTOR ROAD, AND THE RV PARK DOESN'T EVEN MEET LOCATIONAL STANDARDS. NO CONSIDERATION WAS GIVEN BY STAFF OR THE APPLICANT TO THE INCOMPATIBILITY OF EITHER THE REQUESTED USES FOR THE LOW DENSITY AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY TO THE WEST OR TO THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY TO THE NORTH, WHERE HOMES ACTUALLY BACK UP TO OR FACE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. THE SETBACKS, BUFFERING AND SCREENING, AND THEIR ENTIRE APPLICATION ARE THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUMS THAT THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH. I NOTICED THAT MR. PRESSMAN WAS POINTING OUT BERMS ON THE AERIALS, THERE'S NOWHERE IN THEIR APPLICATION THAT SAYS THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PRESERVE THOSE BERMS. THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, AND STAFF DID HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO REQUIRE MORE STRINGENT STANDARDS, BUT THEY DID NOT. NO CONSIDERATION WAS GIVEN TO CREATING A TRANSITION BETWEEN

THE LOT SIZES ON THE WEST. I'M GOING TO SUBMIT A GROOVIC THAT WAS PREPARED BY MR. ADRIAN BISHOP. HE'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT LATER OPINION INTO THE RECORD, I'M GOING TO ENTER MY ENTIRE PRESENTATION WHICH I HAD TO ABBREVIATE. THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES, AND TWO ADDITIONAL LETTERS IN OPPOSITION FOR TWO OF MY NEIGHBORS THAT WERE TO COME HERE TODAY, BUT THEN FOUND OUT THAT THE GENTLEMAN HAD TO HAVE SURGERY TODAY. SO I WANT HIS LETTER TO BE IN THE RECORD. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU'VE GOT ABOUT FOUR MINUTES LEFT.

OKAY. I'LL JUST SHOW MY PICTURES ON THE SCREEN. IT'S OKAY ABOUT. I HAVE SOME VIDEOS AND PICTURES I WANT TO ADD INTO THE RECORD. SOME SHOW SUN GLARE. I'M BRITTANY BERRY. I LIVE AT 19506 BERRY ACRES TRAIL, DIRECTLY WEST OF THE EXISTING BORROW PIT, I AM ON THE DRIVE WAY THAT THEY WANT TO USE AS AN ENTRANCE AND EXIT OF THE RV PARK FOR POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. MY HUSBAND AND I ARE RAISING TWO YOUNG DAUGHTERS ALONGSIDE MY IN-LAWS, JIM AND KATHY BERRY, WHO HAVE LIVED THERE FOR 42 YEARS. WE OWN A SMALL OPERATED FAMILY BUSINESS WITH ONE LOCATION IN YBOR CITY. WE OWN ANOTHER LOCATION IN TRINITY. I'M NOT UNAWARE OF WHERE DEVELOPMENT OCCURS IN THE CITY OF TAMPA AND HEAVY TRAFFIC. I'M FAMILIAR WITH DENSE DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS. I CHOSE TO LIVE IN KEYSTONE/ODESSA, BECAUSE IT PRESERVES OUR RURAL CHARACTER, ONE HOME PER FIVE ACRES. THAT IS WHY WE CHOSE TO LIVE THERE, WHEN I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE OTHER PLACES.

CHAIR: HOLD YOUR APPLAUSE.

OUR PROPERTY SUPPORTS A SMALL COW CALF HEARD. THIS AREA IS ACTIVELY AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL IN NATURE. WHILE YOU CAN SEE IN THIS THAT THE MENTIONED PROPERTIES, OVER TO THE WEST, YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE -- THESE ARE ACTIVE HORSE STABLES, COW CALF OPERATIONS. AND THIS WHOLE AREA IS VERY RURAL AND VERY AGRICULTURAL IN NATURE STILL. RESIDENTS FROM ACROSS HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY VISIT THIS AREA BECAUSE OF ITS RURAL CHARACTER IN NATURE, INCLUDING ITS ACCESS TO UPPER TAMPA BAY TRAIL, WHICH IS CLOSE BY, ONE MILE AWAY. JUST SOME OTHER PICTURES TO SOW YOU. OUR HOUSE IN THE BACKGROUND, PLAYGROUND, OUR COW CALF HERD. THAT'S LOOKING OUT ON LUTZ LAKE FERN ROAD. WHICH IS NOT A MAJOR ARTERIAL, BY THE WAY, IT'S A TWO-LANE ROAD.

CHAIR: A LITTLE LESS THAN TWO MINUTES LEFT. THANK YOU. I'M HERE TODAY TO RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU DENY THE PROPOSED REZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. CHAIR: THANK YOU, FEEL FREE TO SUBMIT WHATEVER YOU LIKE INTO THE RECORD.

MY NAME IS CARRIE O'DONNELL. I LIVE IN ODESSA. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT FOR 20 YEARS, THE CURRENT HOA PRESENT, SERVED ON THE BOARD FOR OVER 10 YEARS. I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF 550 RESIDENTS WHO OPPOSE THIS REZONING REQUEST. THE ESTATES ABUTS THE DIBS PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, WE SHARE A HALF MILE OF COMMON BOUNDARY, WITH 26 HOMES LOCATED JUST 50 FEET TO THE BOUNDARY. THAT'S THE ACTUAL HOUSE STRUCTURE, NOT PROPERTY LINE OR POOL CAGE OR ANYTHING ELSE. MR. DIBS IS ASKING YOU TO DISREGARD THE KEYSTONE ODESSA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS IN PLACE BEFORE HE BOUGHT HIS PROPERTY. APPROVING THIS REQUEST WOULD NOT ONLY UNDERMINE THAT PLAN, BUT SET A TROUBLING PRECEDENT. MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT WOULD ALLOW FOR AN RV PARK THAT WOULD CHANGE AND HARM OUR COMMUNITY. AN RV PARK BRINGS TRAFFIC, INCREASED TRAFFIC, NOISE, SAFETY CONCERNS, INCLUDING SAFETY FOR THE MANY CHILDREN THAT LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY. AS WELL AS A VERY CLEAR RISK TO OUR PROPERTY VALUES. THIS WILL BE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF A FENCE, WHERE THE RESIDENTS LIKE TO ENJOY THE SERENITY OF THEIR OWN BACKYARD. THESE IMPACTS HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED. THIS PRESENTS A BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY AND WHAT IT REPRESENTS FOR OUR RESIDENTS, THEIR HOME, SANCTUARY AND LARGEST INVESTMENT. I ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THE LASTING AND REAL IMPACT ON THE FAMILIES THAT LIVE THERE EVERY DAY AND DENY THIS REQUEST.

CHAIR: THANK YOU. SIR, ARE YOU THE LAST SPEAKER IN YOUR GROUP. I WANT TO MAKE SURE, WE ARE NOW OVER THE 15 MINUTES. WERE YOU PART OF THAT ORIGINAL 15 MINUTE GROUP? NO. YOU'RE PART OF THE THREE EXTRA? YES. YOU TIMED THAT PERFECTLY, THEN. WE'LL GO A MINUTE, IF THAT'S SUFFICIENT, AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

YES, MA'AM, MY NAME IS ROHALIO PENNETTA. I LIVE ON MARSH TRAIL DRIVE ODESSA, FLORIDA. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. WHEN I MOVED HERE TO THIS AREA, WORKING OUT OF MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE, I DID A RESEARCH, WHAT WAS THE BEST LOCATION TO LIVE. WE PICKED THIS AREA, BECAUSE OF THE GREAT SCHOOLS AND FOR THE SAFETY AND SECURITY FOR OUR KIDS. CONSIDERING THAT THERE WILL BE AN RV AREA WITHIN THAT LOCATION, WHERE WE HAVE FOUR SCHOOLS, WE TALKED ABOUT -- THEY TALKED ABOUT 500 FEET BEING FROM THE SUNCOAST HIGHWAY, JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SUNCOAST HIGHWAY IS STEINBRENNER HIGH SCHOOL AND THREE OTHER SCHOOLS. AND WITH THE RV, WITH THE TURNOVER, TERE WILL BE 120 DAYS POTENTIALLY, WITH NEW PEOPLE, IT RUNS RISK FOR THE GREATEST TREASURE WE HAVE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WHICH IS OUR KIDS. THAT'S ALL I GOT.

CHAIR: THANK YOU, SIR. YOU CAN SIGN IN, IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY? NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, I HAVEN'T BEEN SWRORN IN. OKAY. IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE ROOM THAT HAS NOT BEEN SWORN EITHER FOR THIS CASE OR THE REST OF THE AGENDA, IF YOU CAN STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND? DO YOU SWEAR Y-- [ SWEARING-IN ]

BETH WHITE, PO BOX 95 ODESSA. THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION VOTED 50U78SLY TO OPPOSE THERE -- VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION. THIS GOES AGAINST THE KEYSTONE/ODESSA COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH WAS ADOPTED TO PROTECT OUR AREA FROM SUBURBAN AND URBAN SPRAWL. THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL USE IS INAPPROPRIATE AS OUR PLAN'S SPECIFIED AREAS WHICH WOULD BE THE RURAL ACTIVITY CENTER TO SERVE THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMUNITIES COMMERCIAL NEEDS. ADDING OVER 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL, DISCONNECTED FROM ANY OTHER COMMERCIAL AREA IN KEYSTONE BELIES EXPLANATION. KEYSTONE IS NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY, AS LONG AS IT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMMUNITY PLAN. PLEASE DENY THIS.

CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND THE NEXT PERSON PLEASE? GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, TIM MOHAMMED. LUTZ LAKE KEYSTONE. I'M HRE REPRESENTING THE 58 HOMEOWNERS IN THE KEYSTONE HOME OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, I'M THE PRESIDENT, I WANT TO ECHO SOME OF THE OTHER THOUGHTS THAT EDGE EMBROUGHT UP AROUND THIS -- ETHEL BROUGHT UP AROUND THIS BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN. IT'S DISAPPOINTING AS BTH A FATHER, THE HOA PRESIDENT AS WELL AS SOME OF THOSE IN THE AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY, TO SEE THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION IS NOT STEPPING UP, AND ADDRESSING SOME OF THESE CHALLENGES. OUR SCHOOLS ARE AT RISK, THEY'RE ALREADY OVER CROWDED. THE ROAD CAPACITY FOR THIS TYPE OF ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT SUPPORT IT, AND ALTHOUGH THE VET VETERAN'S EXPRESSWAY THERE, IF ANYONE'S TAKEN THAT HOME AT 5:00, YOU REALIZE THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL SPACE. WE'RE HERE ON BEHALF, TO SUPPORT -- WE ASK THAT YOU RECONSIDER THIS, AND DENY. THANK YOU.

CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT WAS THE THREE, IS THERE JUST ONE MORE? REMEMBER THAT TIME WEN WE RAISED OUR HANDS? I RAISED MY HAND. IF YOU COULD REALLY LIMIT IT, ALISON, LET'S DO ONE MORE MINUTE A PIECE, AND JUST THESE FINAL TWO GENTLEMEN.

I LIVE AT 6054 MARSH TRAIL DRIVE ODESSA. WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEING APPLIED FOR. IF ANYONE'S NEVER DRIVEN ALONG LUTZ LAKE FERN ROAD, I WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU DO. IT'S NOT A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY WHATSOEVER ON THAT ROAD. IT'S A TWO-LANE ROAD, THAT HAS NO MEDIAN, NO MARGIN. I MEAN, I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE RV'S DRIVING ALONG THERE, TRYING TO MANEUVER, TRYING TO TURN AROUND BECAUSE THEY MADE A WRONG TURN. IT BRINGS TRANSIENT PEOPLE, SEX OFFENDERS. THIS IS A VERY COMMUNITY ORIENTED AREA, WITH LIKE FAMILIES AND WE'RE ALL CONCERNED FOR OUR CHILDREN. I HAVE THREE CHILDREN OF MY OWN. THANK YOU, I'LL YIELD MY TIME TO THE NEXT PERSON. YES, SIR, GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, MA'AM. ADRIAN BISHOP, 1044 TARPON SPRINGS ROAD, I'VE BEEN IN ODESSA FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW. I WANT TO COVER A FEW THINGS THAT WERE INCONSISTENT WITH MR. PRESSMAN'S BROAD STROKE HE USED FOR OUR AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, I DID A COLOR CODE ON THIS MAP HERE, OFF OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL WEBSITE, RED IS MR. DIBS PROPERTY, YELLOW, .5 TO 1 ACRE, BLUE IS 1 OF 5 ACRES, GREEN IS 5 TO 10 ACRES. HIS DIAGRAM HAD YELLOW THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE AREA. THEY'RE HORSE FARMS, CATTLE FARMS, THEY'RE RANCHES, THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE. TERRA MOORE, IVY LAKES, YOU CAN INCLUDE THAT AS WELL. THAT'S PASCO COUNTY. SHAH VAL, 1980, SO IS TERRA MOORE. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE KEYSTONE PLAN. I YIELD MY TIME, THANK YOU.

CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH, I APPRECIATE IT. WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE OPPOSITION TESTIMONY. OH, WE STILL HAVE THE ONE ONLINE. CHAIR: I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT YOU SAID THERE WAS NO ONE ONLINE. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? CHAIR: ALL RIGHT. THIS IS IT. ONE LAST ONE. I WILL KEEP IT EXTREMELY BRIEF. MY NAME IS ADAM HOLLIFIELD. I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE TERRA MOORE ASSOCIATION, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE 198 HOMES IN THE COMMUNITY. WE SPECIFICALLY OPPOSED THE PD ZONING AND THE 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE, THANK YOU.

CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE OPPOSITION TESTIMONY, AND GO BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. YOU HAVE THE STATUS OF THE TWO PLAN AMENDMENTS? IT WAS VOTED INCONSISTENT ON APRIL 14, 2025 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND TRANSMITTED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON MAY 8th. IT WAS VOTED INCONSISTENT FOR BOTH OF PLAN AMENDMENTS? YES. MISS HEINRICH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES?

YES, I WAS GOING TO ADD, THIS, AS YOU HEARD IS IN ASSOCIATION WITH TWO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS. THOSE TWO AMENDMENTS WILL BE HEARD TOGETHER AT THE MARCH 12th, 2026CPA HEARING, WHICH WOULD BE HERE IN THIS ROOM AT 6:00 P.M. CHAIR: OKAY. AND TRANSPORTATION HAS A FEW COMMENTS. CHAIR: AND THOSE PLAN AMENDMENTS MUST BE APPROVED BEFORE THIS REZONING COULD GO FORWARD? CORRECT. CHAIR: THANK YOU.

JAMES RATLIFF, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. I THINK THE FIRST SPEAKER OPPOSITION SPEAKER SPOKE ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, THAT IT WAS NOT A WORSE CASE SCENARIO, AND RAISED SOME CONCERNS WITH THAT. THE STAFF REPORT WENT ON TO POINT OUT THAT'S WHY A TRIP CAP WAS PLACED ON THAT. THAT WILL CONTROL FOR THAT ISSUE. THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT, EVEN IF THE ENTITLEMENT IS THERE ON PAPER, ONCE THEY BUMP UP ON THAT TRIP CAP THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT PAST THAT. IT'S A MITIGATING ISSUE FOR THAT. THE SECOND ISSUE WAS, THERE WAS A SPEAKER, I THINK MISS HAMMER TALKED ABOUT THE -- YOU KNOW, BERRY ACRES TRAIL, AND BEING IMPROVED TO COLLECTOR ROADWAY STANDARDS. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE COMPATIBILITY ASPECTS OF THE REQUIREMENT IN 6.11.110, BUT TO THE EXTENT THERE'S A TRAFFIC COMPONENT TO THAT REQUIREMENT, THE REQUIREMENT TO UPGRADE BERRY ACRES FS TRAIL IS A SAFETY ISSU. THAT'S WIDER LANES THAT ARE GOING TO INCLUDE BICYCLE FACILITIES, THAT'S A ROAD THAT CAN SAFELY ACCOMMODATE TRAFFIC WITH POTENTIALLY THOSE RVs, FROM AT LEAST A COMPATIBILITY STANDPOINT, BUT A TRANSPORTATION STANDPOINT. THAT'S WHY WE BELIEVE UPGRADING THE ROAD TO A COLLECTOR ROADWAY, WHICH AGAIN WAS ALSO INDICATED UNDER BOTH SCENARIOS, BECAUSE OF THE VOLUMES THAT WERE NEEDED. AGAIN, A LOCAL ROADWAY CAN'T SATISFY THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT'S NEEDED THERE, THAT'S WHY THE STANDARDS -- OR THE CONDITIONS CALL FOR CONSTRUCTING A COLLECTOR ROADWAY, AND WE BELIEVE IT MEETS THE 6.11.110 STANDARD.

CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. MISS MYERS, ONE MORE QUESTION BEFORE I MOVE ON. THE REQUIREMENT THAT -- YOUR STAFF REPORT FOR THIS REZONING FINDS CONSISTENCY, BUT IS IT TRUE THAT IT'S THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S POLICY IF THERE IS A PENDING PLAN AMENDMENT REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S FINDINGS ARE IN THIS CASE, WOULD BE INCONSISTENT, THAT YOU WRITE IT AS IF THEY WERE APPROVED? IS THAT CORRECT. YES, IT IS. CHAIR: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, WE WILL GO BACK TO THE APPLICANT, WHO TYPICALLY WOULD HAVE FIVE MINUTES. BUT WE'VE GONE ON SO LONG, I WOULD CERTAINLY GRANT YOU ADDITIONAL TIME.

WE DON'T INTEND TO USE THAT, BUT WE APPRECIATE THE OFFER. LET ME THANK ALL THE SPEAKERS FOR COMING, IT'S A SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF PROPERTY, WE UNDERSTAND THE INTEREST IN IT, I WILL NOTE FOR THE RECORD, MANY OF THE PEOPLE HERE TONIGHT ALSO OPPOSED TO THE EXTENSION OF THE LAND EXCAVATION PERMIT WHEN WE APPLIED FOR THAT. THE PLAN HAS THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP HIS PROPERTY. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT, BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DECISION, YOUR RECOMMENDATION NEEDS TO BE BASED ON COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, UNDER FLORIDA LAW, THE STAFF REPORT IS COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. CITIZEN OPPOSITION TESTIMONY, WHILE SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER IS NOT COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, YOU NOTED THE NUMBER OF LETTERS IN THE RECORD, IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE, MANY OF THEM ARE FORM LETTERS, THEY SAY, BASICALLY THE SAME THING, THEY'RE A CUT AND PASTE TYPE OF LETTERS. WE ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES IN THOSE LETTERS, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO IMPACT ANY WETLANDS. THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY, IF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PAN AMENDMENTS WERE APPROVED, WE COULD HAVE UNDER THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF UNITS, WE COULD HAVE 1235 UNITS, WE'RE ASKING FOR 392 UNITS. WE'RE WELL BELOW THE DENSITY, IF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ARE APPROVED. I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING UP THAT POINT, WE'RE FULLY AWARE THAT WE HAVE TO BE SUCCESSFUL WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSION ON THOSE TWO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS APPROVED. EVERYTHING IS BASED ON THAT. IF THE BOARD VOTES TO NOT APPROVE THOSE. WE UNDERSTAND THE POSITION YOU'RE IN. AGAIN, I WANT TO COME BACK TO THE STAFF REPORTS, THEY'RE BOTH VERY STRONG. MANY OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP TONIGHT ARE DIRECTLY DEALT WITH IN THE SAFF REPORTS. I WANT TO GO OVER A FEW OF THOSE, BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE IMPORTANT.

THE KEYSTONE/ODESSA PLAN, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGES 6 AND 7, THEY SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE KEYSTONE ODESSA PLAN. THERE'S SOME VERY STRONG LANGUAGE IN THERE. READING ON PAGE 6 NOW, THE SITE DESIGN AND PROPOSED MIT GAS STATION MEASURES INCORPORATE MANY OF THE STANDARDS THAT ARE WITHIN THE RURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES, THESE INCLUDE COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN NEW AND EXISTING USES, MAINTAINING ECOLOGICAL BALANCE, AND PROVIDING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PATHS AND TRAILS WHERE APPROPRIATE TO MOVE PEOPLE WITHOUT CARS. TURNING OVER TO PAGE 7, YOU ALSO HAVE VERY STRONG LANGUAGE ABOUT THE KEYSTONE ODESSA PLAN. ALL DENSITY, INTENSITY CALCULATIONS WERE CALCULATED ONLY USING THE UPLAND AREAS, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE STRATEGY OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT, THE LAST SENTENCE IN THIS PARAGRAPH. OVERALL, THE PROPOSED PLAN DEVELOPMENT REZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE KEYSTONE ODESSA PLAN. THAT'S COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE GIVEN GREAT WEIGHT UNDER FLORIDA LAW. THE COMMERCIAL USES WERE ALSO BROUGHT UP. FOR THE RECORD, I'LL DIRECT YOU TO PAGE 5 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S REPORT THAT DEALS USES.TLY WITH THE COMMERCIAL - AND THEY FOUND THAT CONSISTENT WITH OBJECTIVE 4.6. WE WOULD LIKE CONSIDERATION OF ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT LIMITS THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS TO ONE STORY. WE WOULD LIKE YGS OF TWO STORIES, THAT SEEMS REASONABLE, GIVEN THAT WE LIVE IN FLORIDA AND THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. WITH THAT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. PRESSMAN IF HE HAS ANY COMMENTS. WE WOULD APPRECIATE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. THANK YOU.

CHAIR: THANK YOU.

I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK. I WANT TO MAKE ONE OBSERVATION, WITH GREATEST RESPECT TO THE RESIDENTS WHO HAVE SPOKEN. I HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR THEM, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT AS I WAS CATCHING ADDRESSES OF FOLKS SPEAKING, AND AS I LOOK THROUGH A NUMBER OF THE EMAILS AND LETTERS THAT COME IN, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS EVENING, TWO SPEAKERS WERE FROM IVY LAKES, TWO FROM TERRA MOORE, TWO FROM MULCH TRAIL. THOSE ARE HOMES THAT ARE SUBDIVISIONS VERY TIGHTLY DEVELOPED. IN A SIMILAR FASHION TO WHAT'S PROPOSED HERE. I THINK -- I DON'T LIKE TO SPEAK NEGATIVELY, IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT A LOT OF THE SPEAKERS AND A LOT OF THE LETTERS I SAW IN THE FILE, WHO ARE OPPOSING THIS, LIVE IN HIGHER DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID AND PUT ON THE RECORD, THANK YOU.

CHAIR: THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES OUR REBUTTAL, THANK YOU. CHAIR: THANK YOU. WITH THAT WE'LL CLOSE REZONING, 25-0934. WE'LL GO TO MM25-1239. JARED BALL WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL PROVIDE STAFF'S FINDINGS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. I'M SORRY, COULD YOU PLEASE --

CHAIR: IF YOU COULD ALL EXIT QUIETLY, WE ALL NEED TO CONTINUE ON WITH THIS AGENDA. COULD YOU PLEASE STEP OUT. CHAIR: IS THE APPLICANT HERE?

YES. TODD PRESSMAN. THIS IS MAJOR MOD 25-1239. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FOUND THIS REQUEST CONSISTENT. IT'S MAJOR MODIFICATION PRIMARILY TO UPDATE THE CURRENT PD FROM 1985 TO CG USES FROM THE OLD C1, AND ADD A BUILDING ON THE OUT PARCEL. THE CONDITIONS REGARDING THE OUT PARCEL WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWABLE FOR DRIVE THROUGH PHARMACY, LIKE A MARIJUANA OR PHARMACY LIKE A MARIJUANA DISPENSARY USE. NO GAS, NO VEHICLE REPAIR SERVICES. ONLY FOOD SERVICE WOULD BE FOR TAKE OUT USE ONLY, NO DINING IN. WE'RE TRYING TO RESTRICT THE IMPACTS OF THAT PROPOSED OUT PARCEL BUILDING. THIS IS THE 1985 PLAN, AND THE 96PRS PLAN. 1995 WAS THE MOST RECENT -- THE OLDEST I COULD FIND THAT SHOWED THE SITE. WE'RE LOCATED IN THE LIEUTENANTS AREA. THIS IS THE LOCATION ON BEARSS WHICH IS CLOSE TO BRUCE B. DOWNS. TWO PARCELS ON BEARSS AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, AND ALSO ON NORTH 30th STREET. FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES ARE 20RKS NEXT TWO ARE 12. AND ZONING ARE A NUMBER OF PD'S THAT RUN ALONG BEARSS AND SKIPPER. THIS IS THE CURRENT PD PLAN, YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED BUILDING ENVELOPE THERE AS HIGHLIGHTED. THIS WAS THE BUILDING SITE CHARACTERISTIC, WHICH IS THE RETAIL STRIP CENTER. PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICES IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF A NUMBER OF POLICIES. SUBJECT SITE DOES MEET

COMMERCIAL LOCATIONAL CRITERIA, AND THEY FIND THAT THE PROPOSED MAJOR MODIFICATION IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT 359 EARN. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DID NOT FORESEE ANY COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS, THE CHANGE TO CG WILL ALLOW THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO BE UP TO DATE WITH THE CURRENT LDC, AND WHILE THE CHAIN SLIGHTLY INCREASES THE INTENSITY TO THE SITE, THE LOCATION IS APPROPRIATE FOR COMMERCIAL USES. HOWEVER, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DID HAVE CONCERNS WITH SOME TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. LIBBY RODRIGUEZ IS HERE, SHE'S GOING TO SPEAK TO THOSE. AND SPEAK TO THOSE DIRECTLY, THANK YOU.

CHAIR: APPRECIATE IT. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN.

ELIZABETH RODRIGUEZ, SANDY POINT DRIVE, TAMPA, FLORIDA. RELATIVE TO TRANSPORTATION, WHAT IS AT ISSUE HERE, THE TRANSPORTATION STAFF WANT THE FULL ACCESS DRIVEWAY YOU'RE LOOKING AT ON BEARSS AVENUE, TURNED INTO A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ONLY. FROM BEARS AVENUE, YOU CAN'T MAKE A LEFT IN OR OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY. THE DEVELOPER DOES NOT WANT TO DO THAT. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS UNLIKE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT. THOSE OTHER LAND USES ARE DELIBERATE DESTINATIONS. IF IT'S INCONVENIENT TO GET TO YOUR HOUSE OR OFFICE, YOU WILL NOT GO TO ANOTHER HOUSE OR A DIFFERENT OFFICE. COMMERCIAL USES ARE MORE INTERCHANGEABLE. IF A STORE OR RESTAURANT IS DIFFICULT TO GET IN AND OUT OF, PEOPLE WILL GO TO A DIFFERENT PLACE. THIS DEVELOPER DOES NOT WANT TO LOSE HALF HIS EXISTING BEARSS ACCESS, FURTHERMORE, HE'S NOT CONVINCED THIS IS A DANGEROUS SITUATION. I ASKED STAFF TO PULL FIVE YEARS OF ACCIDENT REPORTS WHICH INCLUDE THIS DRIVEWAY, THE ONE ACROSS BEARSS AND ANY APPROACHING THE SIGNAL AT BRUCE B. DOWNS AND LIVINGSTON. ALL THAT TRAFFIC IS CO MINGLED IN FRONT OF THE SITE. LET'S SEE IF I CAN SHOW YOU. THE FIRST THING TO NOTE IS THERE WERE NO FATALITIES AND NO SEVERE INJURIES. THE VAST MAJORITY OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE ARE CRASHES OF PEOPLE IN LINE FOR THE TWO SIGNALS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY REAR ENDING ONE ANOTHER, AND IT'S COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO THIS DRIVEWAY.

WHEN WE SUBJECT THOSE, THERE ARE ONLY 10 CRASHES OVER A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, AND AVERAGE OF 2 PER YEAR. SO THAT IS AN AVERAGE OF ONE NONSEVERE CRASH PER YEAR, TO THE SOUTHBOUND BEARSS AVENUE THAT USE THIS MEDIAN OPENING. AND AN AVERAGE OF ONE CRASH PER YEAR FOR OUR BEARSS AVENUE DRIVEWAY. THERE ARE NOT STANDARDS FOR THIS EXACT SCENARIO TO SAY WHAT IT IS OR IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE NUMBER OF CRASHES, THERE ARE STANDARDS INVOLVING NUMBERS OF CRASHES FOR SIGNAL AND FOUR WAY STOP WARRANTS AND FOR THOSE, ONE CRASH PER YEAR WOULD BE CONSIDERED INSIGNIFICANT. IT WAS INTERESTING TO SEE THAT EVEN DURING THE PEAK HOURS, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE SIGNALS ARE TIMED, THERE ARE TIMES WHEN LEFT TURNERS CAN EGRESS THE DRIVEWAY VERY EASILY. THIS PHOTO WAS TAKEN AT 5:39 P.M. ON A THURSDAY. HOWEVER, THERE'S ALSO SATURATED CONDITIONS, WHERE TRAFFIC FROM BOTH ADJACENT SIGNALS BACKS UP TO THE MEDIAN OPENING. COUNTER INTUITIVELY, THE SATURATED CONDITION IS NOT UNSAFE. TRAFFIC IS MOVING VERY SLOWLY, LIKE IN A PARKING LOT, AND PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, AS EVIDENCED BY THE HISTORIC LACK OF ACCIDENTS. ACCESS MANAGEMENT CAN BECOME TOO DRACONIAN, WHERE IT'S BAD FOR BUSINESS. AND THE DEVELOPER IS ABLE TO INVEST IN NORTH TAMPA AND IMPROVE IT. MAKING PEOPLE DRIVE EXTRA MILEAGE AND MAKE U-TURNS ADDS EXTRA MILES TO THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. THIS AREA APPEARS T BE VERY OVER PARKED. YOU'LL HAVE TO TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. THESE PHOTOS WERE TAKEN DURING

THE P.M. PEEK HOUR. WE ARE ALSO SUPPOSED TO CONSIDER MASS TRANSIT. THE MAIN REASON TRANSIT WORKS I NORTHERN CITIES AND NOT IN SUNBELT CITIES, THESE CITIES WERE DEVELOPED LATER AND THEY'RE LESS DENSE. TRANSIT DOESN'T WORK IN LESS DENSE CITIES. THIS TRANSITION IS TO ADD DENSITY IN LIEU OF AN UNUSED PARKING LOT.

CHAIR: LET ME ASK YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS, AS YOU KNOW, AND BEFORE PRESSMAN WEIGH-IN IF YOU NEED TO, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FINDS THIS CONSISTENT. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS, FOR THE MOST PART OKAY WITH IT, EXCEPT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ISSUE. AND WE'LL GET TO MR. RATLIFF AND I'LL GET HIS THOUGHTS. WHILE YOU'RE UP HERE, THE PHOTOS OF THAT SITE SHOW A FULL ACCESS. YEAH, MEDIAN OPENING, YEAH.

CHAIR: YOUR REQUEST IS ---ESTLY THE COUNTY -- EVIDENTLY THE COUNTY WANTS RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT, AND YOU WANT TO KEEP IT A FULL ACCESS POINT. FROM READING MR. RATLIFF'S STAFF REPORT, IT SHOWS THAT ISSUE WAS NOT EVIDENT TO ME AT ALL. WHAT WAS EVIDENT, HE WAS LACKING INFORMATION. AND YOU APPLIED FOR, OR SOMEONE APPLIED FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE THAT THE COUNTY ENGINEER WAS NOT ABLE TO EVALUATE, BECAUSE THERE WASN'T SUFFICIENT INFORMATION. IT APPEARS THAT THAT DISCUSSION HAS NOT TAKEN PLACE OF THE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT, VERSUS THE FULL ACCESS, BECAUSE IT APPEARS THAT THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT DATA TO DO THAT. WEIGH-IN ON THAT,ING AND THEN WHEN IT'S MR. RATLIFF'S TURN, I'LL GET HIS POINT OF VIEW.

I DON'T KNOW, I JUST WAS TOLD THAT THE STAFF WANTED A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT DRIVEWAY, AND WE WERE GOING TO GO FORWARD TO ZHM AND THAT WE NEEDED TO SHOW THAT WE NEEDED A FULL MEDIAN OPENING. CHAIR: OKAY. YOU'RE SAYING THE DRIVEWAY SPACING VARIANCE? CHAIR: YES, THERE'S SPACING ISSUES, THERE'S CUEING ISSUES.

YEAH, AND I THINK THAT -- YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT THEY DON'T -- I'M SPECULATING HERE, I KNOW THEY DON'T REPAIR ZONING CONDITIONS IF THEY'RE NOT RECOMMENDING IN FAVOR, SO MAYBE WE THOUGHT THAT THAT ALL KIND OF STOPPED AS WELL, AS FAR AS ANY VARIANCES OR DESIGN EXCEPTIONS AS WELL, AND THAT WOULD BE DONE ASSUMING THIS GOT APPROVED LIKE AT SITE PLAN OR SOMETHING. CHAIR: OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THIS WILL GO ON, I WANTED TO GET YOUR TAKE ON IT, MR. PRESSMAN, IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANYTHING. I HAVE PREPARED A LIST OF CONDITIONS TO PUT ON THE RECORD, IF I MAY.

CHAIR: OKAY. DOES THAT COMPLETE YOUR PRESENTATION? YES, IT DOES, BUT I WOULD LIKE -- AS YOU'RE BRINGING UP THIS ISSUE OF PERSONALLY NOT HAVING A COMPLETE DISCUSSION OR INFORMATION, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR, WHICH I'M SURE WE WILL FROM MR. RATLIFF, AND IF WE HAVE TO ADDRESS IT, WE WILL EITHER NOW OR IN THE FUTURE. WEEN WATT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE HAS THE INFORMATION THEY NEED. CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. THEN WE WILL GO TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, JARED FALLIN WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THIS IS A REQUEST TO MODIFY A PORTION OF 85-0355, THAT PERMITS 35,000 SQUARE FEET OF C1 USES TO THOSE ALLOWED IN THE CG COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THIS REQUEST ALSO SEEKS CHANGES TO THE GENERAL TIGHT PLAN WITH RESTRICTIONS, PROHIBITING CONVENIENCE STORES WITH OR WITHOUT GAS PUMPS. THE SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A SHOPPING CENTER COMPRISED OF VARIOUS USES. THE OUT PARCEL IS VACANT AND PROVIDES AN 228 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING PERMIT, WHICH IS THE AMOUNT OF REMAINING ENTITLEMENTS AVAILABLE IN THE PD. THE SITE IS AVAILABLE ON THE MAJOR ROADWAY. MULTIFAMILY LIES ADJACENT TO THE NORTH, EAST AND SOUTH. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ZONING DOES NOT HAVE ANY COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES OF THE PD, THE UPDATE TO CG WILL ALLOW THE UPDATE TO BE IN THE CURRENT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. HOWEVER, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION DUE TO SEVERAL CONCERNS RAISED BY THE TRANSPORTATION. THE APPLICATION DOES NOT INCLUDE SUFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSAL AND DID NOT ADDRESS SAFETY CONCERNS, INCLUDING ACCESS AND CUEING ISSUES. MORE INFORMATION ON TRANSPORTATION'S POSITION IS PROVIDED ON SECTION 9 OF THE REPORT. I ALSO HAVE A REVISED STAFF REPORT, JUST SOME MINOR CHANGES.

CHAIR: THANK YOU. MR. RATLIFF, GIVE US YOUR TAKE ON THIS.

SO YEAH, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THEY CAN PROVIDE, I MEAN, THE HEA HEARING, THE RECORD CLOSES AFTON THE. WE DID INFORM THE APPLICANT IN OUR OPINION THIS WAS NOT A SUFFICIENT APPLICATION. I THINK THE TIME TO HAVE CURED THE APPLICATION WOULD HAVE BEEN DURING THE EFFICIENCY PROCESS SO THAT COULD HAVE BEEN REVIEWED, I DID NOT SIT IN IN THE MEETINGS BETWEEN THE APPLICANTS, ENGINEER OF RECORD, AND THE COUNTY ENGINEER, TYPICALLY THAT'S THE MANAGER OF TRANSPORTATION REVIEW SECTION. MY BOSS, WHO IS THE LIAISON TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER FOR THOSE. THEY HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER TO GET APPLICATION READY TO PUT FORTH TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER, ULTIMATELY, THEY ENDED UP WITHDRAWING THOSE VARIANCES, AND THAT GOES HAND IN HAND WITH ACCESS. YOU KNOW, SO I CAN'T RELATE TO YOU ALL OF THE SPECIFIC CONCERNS OR ISSUES. JUST SIMPLY SPEAKING, ACCESS MANAGEMENT IS NOT ONLY ABOUT SAFETY, IT'S ABOUT OPERATIONAL IMPACTS. AND THE GRIDLOCK PICTURE SHE SHOWED, THIS ROAD HAS A V OVER C, PUT IT IN THE STAFF REPORT OF, IT'S EXCEEDINGLY PAST THE POINT OF FAILURE. SO AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, ACCESS MANAGEMENT IS ALSO ABOUT MAINTAINING STABLE FLOW ON ROADWAYS, AND ALSO, IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.

CHAIR: IT'S ACCURATE TO SAY THERE'S A LACK OF DATA AND ANALYSIS THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT IN ORDER FOR YOU TO DO YOUR ANALYSIS? CORRECT. AND A LOOK OF ADDITIONAL -- AGAIN, THEY HAD SUBMITTED A VARIANCE, AND WITH DREW IT AND WE'RE GOING TO DEFER IT TO SITE. HOW DO YOU UNCOUPLE THAT FROM THE ACCESS SPACING ISSUE, BECAUSE HAVING A SHORT THROAT, THEN EXACERBATES AN ACCESS SPACING WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR SAFETY. THOSE THINGS GO HAND IN HAND, YOU REALLY CAN'T LOOK AT THEM SEPARATELY. THE COUNTY ENGINEER INFORMED ME OF HIS INTENT TO DENY THE REMAINING VARIANCE. AND THAT'S WHERE IT'S POSITIONED.

CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. MR. PRESSMAN. IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A LACK OF INFORMATION FROM THE COUNTY'S PERSPECTIVE. AND THAT POSITION OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, CANNOT CHANGE UNTIL THAT INFORMATION IS PROVIDED AND SO FORTH. I WOULD GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE THIS APPLICATION OR WE CAN MOVE FORWARD, YOUR CHOICE.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I'M NOT SURE IF WE HAVE CLARITY ON THAT. I DID HEAR JAMES, WHO I HAVE RESPECT FOR, SAY HE WAS NOT INVOLVED IN ALL THOSE DISCUSSIONS. LIBBY HAS MET WITH MR. WILLIAMS, REVIEWED THIS WITH HIM. I DON'T KNOW IF THEIR COMMUNICATION SAYING NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION TO APPROVE, OR WE SUPPLIED WHAT WE WANTED TO MR. WILLIAMS AND HIS RESPONSE WAS, WE CAN'T APPROVE, AND BRINGING THAT FORWARD TO YOU. WHEN I ASKED LIBBY, LIBBY INDICATED SHE PRESENTED TO HIM THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAD TO PROVIDE. SO WITH THE GREATEST RESPECT, IF I CAN HAVE LIBBY -- IF I MAY, WE MAY BE OUT OF SYNC HERE, I'D LIKE TO HAVE LIBBY ON THE RECORD IF THERE IS ANY MORE INFORMATION FOR THE COUNTY. IF WE RECEIVED A NO FROM TRANSPORTATION, AND WE WANT TO PROCEED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, WITH INFORMATION THAT QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK LIBLY'S INFORMATION IS EXTREMELY CLEAR THAT THERE HAS BEEN A SMALL AMOUNT OF ACCIDENT HISTORY REGARDING THE ISUES.

CHAIR: LET ME JUST -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO BELABOR THIS POINT, THIS IS A TRANSPORTATION ISSUE, AND WHAT YOU WANT IS A MAJOR MODIFICATION THAT PERTAINS TO A ZONING, AND SO I'M JUST TELLING YOU THAT RECOMMENDATION OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HINGES ON THIS TRANSPORTATION ISSUE. YES. CHAIR: IT IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE, MR. RATLIFF, WITHOUT ADDITIONAL DATA HE FEELS HE'S TESTIFIED TO, HE DOES NOT HAVE. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED AS THE FACTS ARE RIGHT NOW, I'M -- THAT'S PERFECT WITH ME. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE LIBBY RESPOND.

CHAIR: ONE MINUTE HERE, WE ARE OUT OF ORDER MEANING SEQUENTIALLY. OKAY. MR. WILLIAMS HAS NOT FOUND THE DRIVEWAY SPACING VARIANCE APPROVABLE AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF THEY COULD IF THEY AGREED WITH ME ABOUT THE CLOSING. I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT COULD BE CONTINUED IF WE FOUND THAT APPROVABLE OR NOT.

I THINK THE LACK OF CLARITY HERE, ON OUR PART, WE'LL ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE, BRING IT BACK, AND HAVE LIBBY ITERATE BACK WITH JAMES AND MR. WILLIAMS, THANK YOU. CHAIR: ABSOLUTELY. WHAT WOULD BE THE DATE FOR THE CONTINUANCE? MARCH 23rd. CHAIR: OKAY, WITH THAT, WE'LL CONTINUE MM25-1239TO THE MARCH 23rd, ZONING MASTER HEARING AT 6:00 P.M. THANK YOU.

OUR NEXT ITEM IS MM25-1247. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO PD04-0459.

GOOD EVENING, KAMI CORBETT WITH THE LAW FIRM OF HILL, WARD AND HENDERSON. I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT WHICH IS THE BRIDGES OF SWEETWATER GRAND. THIS IS AN EXISTING ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, AND WE'LL GET THAT BACK UP FOR THE GRAPHIC. THIS IS AN EXISTING ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. IT'S LOCATED IN BETWEEN PROVIDENCE AND KING AVENUE. THE FUTURE LAND USE IS RES 6 AND RES 12. THE ZONING IS PD, YOU CAN SEE THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT. THE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AND CLUBHOUSE ARE FULLY CONSTRUCTED. THERE'S SOME UNDEVELOPED, UNPLATTED LAND IN THE AREA TOO. BASICALLY, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS TAKING FOUR RESIDENTIAL UNITS FROM THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING THEM INTO AN ADDITIONAL 20 BEDS IN THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL HOME. THAT WILL BE CONTAINED WITH -- THOSE BEDS WILL BE CONTAINED WITHIN THE EXISTING BUILDING. WE'RE ALSO ESTABLISHING A VARIETY OF USES PERMITTED IN THE CLUBHOUSE, WE'RE HAVING A RESTAURANT, PERSONAL SERVICES, SATELLITE, PHARMACY AND RECREATIONAL USES. ONE THING I NOTICED WHEN I WAS PUTTING THIS SLIDE TOGETHER, THERE WERE INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE SITE DATA TABLE. SOME OF THE PRIOR CERTIFICATION CONDITIONS WILL CHANGE THE -- IT SAYS, WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN, SAYS THE PROPOSED INCREASE TO 117 UNITS. THE CLUBHOUSE WILL INCLUDE THOSE ADDITIONAL SERVICES. THEY'LL JUST BE NOTED ON THE SITE PLAN, SO THERE'S NO CONFUSION IN THE FUTURE. EXISTING FACILITY, WE INTEND TO MAKE FULL USE OF WHAT IS THERE ALREADY, NO NEW CONSTRUCTION IS PROPOSED TO ACCOMPLISH THESE CHANGES. WE JUT WANT TO MAKE IT A MORE SAUDI ARABIA RANT COMMUNITY. THE -- MAKE IT A MORE VIBRANT COMMUNITY.

ALL THE RESIDENTS WITHIN THE PD CAN ACCESS THOSE. WE FOUND CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA, AND EVERYONE HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL AND WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY DO THE SAME. WE DID HAVE ONE EMAIL IN THE RECORD, REGARDING PATTERSON STREET AND SOME OF THE FLOODING CONDITIONS, AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE TODD COME UP AND ADDRESS THAT. CHAIR: CAN I ASK YOU ONE QUESTION BEFORE HE COMES UP. THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF BEDS FOR THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL HOME, EQUATES TO THE DECREASE THAT CONVERSION -- CORRECT. CHAIR: DECREASE IN THE SINGLE FAMILY? YES. CHAIR: THANK YOU. MR. AMADAN, GOOD EVENING.

LANDMARK ENGINEERING, 8515 PALM RIVER ROAD. I BELIEVE THE COMMENT HAD TO DO WITH PATTERSON ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY, AND STORM WATER ISSUES, I WILL NOTE, FR THE RECORD, THIS COMMUNITY IS A MASTER STORM WATER PLAN, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE AERIAL, AND HAS A CENTRALLY STORM WATER POND. ALL RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT, DIRECTED TO THE INTERIOR POND WITH OUT FALL, AND THIS REQUEST DOESN'T HAVE ANY EFFECT ON STORM WATER, I DON'T SEE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OR SWFWMD DRAINAGE ISSUE BECAUSE OF IT. THE BOUNDARY, STARTS AS A HISTORICAL ROADWAY, AND GETS SUB, SUBSTANDARD AS YOU GO NORTH FROM THERE. PROBABLY 12, 14 FEET OF PAVEMENT, THERE'S NO CURB, NO GUTTER, NO STORM WATER FACILITIES, IT'S A HISTORIC LOCAL ROAD. I DON'T SEE THIS PROJECT HAVING ANY NEGATIVE EFFECT WHATSOEVER ON IT.

CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUC. IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS IT OR MISS CORBETT CAN, THE LETTER TALKED ABOUT POSSIBLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF LIGHT. LIGHT INTRUSION, LIGHT POLLUTION I THINK IS THE TERM THEY USED, AND IF THERE ARE ANY WAIVERS TO THE CODE REQUIREMENTS REGARDING THAT. KAMI CORBETT AGAIN. THERE ARE NO WAIVERS OR VARIATIONS THAT ARE REQUESTED, THAT ARE IN THE EXISTING PD OR THIS ONE THAT WOULD AFFECT IN A. CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT WAS IT, APPRECIATE IT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES?

TIM LAMPKIN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, FOR MM25-1247. I'LL MAKE THIS BRIEF, YOU KNOW THE LOCATION, IT'S OFF OF BLOOMINGDALE AVENUE, IT'S JUST NORTH OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS WINTHROP, WHICH IS DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL TYPES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH AN ON SITE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL HOME. AMENITIES INCLUDE A CLUBHOUSE, COMMERCIAL OUTPARCEL, WHICH IS NOT PART OF THIS REQUEST, WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE PD. PER CONDITION NO. 1, THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS SUBJECT TO LDC SECTION 6.11.51, WHICH REQUIRES AT LEAST 80% OF THE UNITS ARE OCCUPIED BY AT LEAST 1 PERSON, 55 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER PER UNIT. THE DEVELOPMENT ALLOWS A MIX OF DWELLING UNIT TYPES. INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DUPLEX, TRIPLEX AND QUAD PLEX, THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL HOME TYPE C CURRENTLY ALLOWS 101 UNITS. WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DO, AND YOU ASKED THE QUESTION ALREADY, THE RATIO IS A 5 TO 1 RATIO, THEY'RE DECREASING THE NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TYPES AND QUADS TO -- BY FOUR UNITS, AND CONCURRENTLY, INCREASING THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL HOME BY 20 BEDS, AND THE REVISIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT AS THE APPLICANT NOTED. THE APPLICANT NOTED THAT SOME OF THE CARRYOVER ON THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN, THEY MADE THE MODIFICATIONS IN THE SITE DATA TABLE, THERE WERE A COUPLE NOTES THAT THE APPLICANT DIDN'T CHANGE, AND SO THEY'RE -- THOSE ARE THE -- THAT'S WHY THE PRIOR

SITE PLAN CERTIFICATION REVISIONS HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT. AND THE APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSES ALLOWING MORE USES WITHIN THE CLUBHOUSE, INCLUDING A MEMBERS RESTAURANT WITH ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SERVICE, WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS IN PROCESS, SPECIAL USE A.D., PERMIT THAT WILL BE COMING TO WHOEVER IS AT THE LUHO IN APRIL AFTER -- IF IT'S APPROVED. AND THE APPLICANT'S NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIATIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND STAFF FINDS IT SUPPORTABLE. CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH, APPRECIATE IT. PLANNING COMMISSION?

ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE R6 AND R12 SERVICE AREA, IN THE BRANDON COMMUNITY PLAN. THE SURROUNDING AREA REFLECTS RESIDENTIAL USES, INCLUDING THE USE OF THE SITE ITSELF. ALTHOUGH LIGHT COMMERCIAL USES ARE LOCATED TO THE SOUTH, THEY ARE LARGELY SEPARATED BY WEST BLOOMINGDALE AVENUE, AND DO NOT INFLUENCE THE USE. THE SUBJECT SITE HAS ALREADY LONG FUNCTIONED AS A INSTITUTIONAL RESIDENTIAL USE. AND THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS WOULD NOT HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE INTENT OF OBJECTIVE 1.1, 3.1 AND 4.4, AND ASSOCIATED POLICIES REGARDING COMPATIBILITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION. THE REQUESTED MODIFICATION MAINTAINS CONSISTENCY WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, WHICH ALLOWS FOR A LIMITED INTERNAL REALLOCATION OF DENSITY TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, WITHOUT INCREASING A BROAD DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY. CERTAIN NONRESIDENTIAL LAND USES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO RESIDENTIAL LAND USES, SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHIN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS TO DIRECTLY SERVE THE POPULATION. IT IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE BRANDON COMMUNITY PLAN, BY REMAINING WITH THE INTENT OF THE SUBURBAN CHARACTERIZATION. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED MAJOR MODIFICATION CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE OR ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT ANYONE IN FAVOR? SEEING NO ONE. ANYONE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST? NO ONE. MISS HAEINRICH ANYTHING ELSE? NO, MA'AM. CHAIR: WITH THAT WE'LL CLOSE MM25-1247 AND GO TO THE LAST CASE. OUR LAST ITEM IS MM25-1354. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO PP PD 89-0061.

MY NAME IS PATRICIA ORTIZ, MY ADDRESS IS 2810 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE TAMPA, 33602. WE ARE SEEKING A MAJOR MODIFICATION, THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SHELDON ROAD, ABOUT 200 FEET NORTH OF MOHR ROAD. IT'S .77 ACRES IN SIZE. IT IS DESIGNATED AS RES 20 ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, LOCATED WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY APPROVED FOR 6300 SQUARE FEET OF MEDICAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. THE INTENT IS TO CHANGE THE APPROVED USE TO A 15 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX, WHICH TRANSLATES TO A DENSITY OF 19 PBT 5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THE PETITION RECEIVED FAVORABLE REVIEWS FROM THE REVIEWING AGENCIES. I WOULD SAY THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS REASONABLE, CONSIDERING THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE AREA, AND IT'S PROXIMITY TO EXISTING MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. THIS MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT EXISTS ABUTS THE SITE ON THE NORTH, THE SOUTH AND THE WEST. THE PROPOSAL IS APPROPRIATE CONSIDERING THE LOCATION WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA, AND THE COUNTY'S GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY. THE PROJECT WILL GENERATE LESS THAN 50 PEAK HOUR TRIPS, SHELDON ROAD IS A DIVIDED ARTERIAL ROADWAY. IT HAS FOUR LANES CURRENTLY, BUT THE CORRIDOR PRESERVATION PLAN SHOWS A FUTURE IMPROVEMENT TO A SIX LANE ROADWAY, SO THE DEVELOPER HAS AGREED TO CONDITIONS TO DEDICATE BETWEEN 3 1/2 AND 4 1/2 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY. ACCESS IS LIMITED TO A SINGLE

DRIVEWAY, THAT WOULD BE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT, EXTENDING FROM SHELDON ROAD. AND PEDESTRIANS CROSS ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED. WATER AND SEWER LINES EXIST ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG SHELDON ROAD, ALONG THE PROJECT FRONTAGE. WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY VARIANCES OR VARIATIONS, HOWEVER, WE DO NOT MEET THE 2 FOR 1 SET BACK REQUIREMENT. WE ARE PROPOSING IN LIEU OF THE 2 FOR 1 SET BACK A TEN FOOT TYPE A BUFFER. AND THAT WOULD BE ALONG THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST PROPERTY BOUNDARIES ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY BOUNDARY WHERE THE SITE ABUTS EXISTING MULTIFAMILY, THE SCREENING WOULD BE A -- AN OPAQUE FENCE, A PVC FENCE. TYPICALLY, BUFFERING AND SCREENING IS NOT REQUIRED BETWEEN MULTIFAMILY USES, 12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE HIGHER. AND IN ADDITION TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL MITIGATION OR SENSITIVITY TO THE ADJACENT LAND USES, THE BUILDING IS PUSHED TO THE WEST, ALLOWING THE PARKING AND DRIVE AISLES CLOSE TORE SHELDON ROAD AND IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. WITH THAT, I'LL STAND FOR QUESTIONS AND --

CHAIR: NO QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. ONE FINAL THING, I DIDN'T SEE ANY OPPOSITION IN THE RECORD, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW. CHAIR: IF YOU LOOK BEHIND YOU, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S ANYONE HERE FOR YOU DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN. THANK YOU. CHAIR: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES?

GOOD EVENING, JARED FALLIN WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THIS IS MAJOR MODIFICATION TO GO FROM OFFICE TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL. THIS DOES INCLUDE AN INCREASE OF HEIGHT AT 45 FEET. THEY ARE PROVIDING A BUFFER AND SCREENING WHICH THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO, BY CODE, BUT THEY'RE PROVIDING IT. THEY ALSO FOUND THAT THE ORIENTATION OF THE ADJACENT MULTIFAMILY IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SETBACK AND THE BUFFER FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE. SO WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY COMPATIBILITY ISSUES WITH THAT, AND WE'RE FINDING IT APPROVABLE. CHAIR: THANK YOU SO MUCH. PLANNING COMMISSION PLEASE?

ALEXIS MYERS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE SITE IS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE NORTHWEST AREA AND TOWN & COUNTRY COMMUNITY PLANS. THE SITE IS ALSO WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. THE REQUESTED DENSITY DOES NOT EXCEED THE ALLOWABLE DENSITITY, APPLICANTS ARE NOT SEEKING ANY DENSITY BONUSES PROHIBITED IN THE CHHA. UNDER FUTURE LAND SECTION POLICY, THEREFORE, THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH URBAN SERVICE AREA AND CHHA OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES. GIVEN THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT CONSISTS OF HIGHER DNSITY, WITH SINGLE FAMILY USES ORIENTED ON THE EASTSIDE OF SHELDON ROAD, THE PROPOSED REQUEST IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, AND WOULD NOT NEGATIVELY -- WOULD NOT IMPACT THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES, AND THEREFORE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE OBJECTIVE 1.1 AND 4.4 REGARDING COMPATIBILITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION. THE SITE MEETS THE INTENT OF THE NORTHWEST AREA COMMUNITY PLAN, HOWEVER, THERE ARE NO APPLICABLE POLICIES WITHIN THE TOWN AND COUNTRY COMMUNITY PLAN. BASED ON THOSE CONSIDERATIONS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDS THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

CHAIR: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE OR IN THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? SEEING NO ONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE. ARE THERE ANY LAST WORDS? NO, MA'AM. CHAIR: WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE MM25-1354 AND ADJOURN THE HEARING. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.