##VIDEO ID:vmTNZInak1Q## I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting to order. First of all, I want to thank everybody for coming. It's been a roller coaster the last couple of months. And so we haven't had a meeting I guess, in a couple of months. So let's go ahead and start the meeting off right with the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. One nation under God, with liberty and justice for all. Normally, Mr. Vessey leads us in a moment of reflection. Since he's not here, I guess, I guess that burden will fall on me. First of all, to reflect on the last couple of months. You know, we want to thank. I'd actually like to thank the city of Tarpon Springs, its staff, the administrators and the people that are out on the field because we fared much, much better than most communities. And I attribute that to the people that that work in this city love this city and how everybody pulled together in that time. And I think God had his hand over us because people fared much, much worse. So in that regard, that is my moment of reflection. Thank you. At this point, I'd like to go ahead and call the call to order. Roll call please. Here. Mr. Vessey. Mr. Zambellas is out. Miss Francis. Here. Mr. Here. Miss. Early. Here. Miss Swenson. Here. Miss Weaver. Here. Okay. This is. It's this. I was the interim chair. I think the next meeting for the agenda. I think we need to go ahead and have a slate of officers to see who. Who will be appointed for the chair moving forward. So moving forward, then let's go. Let's go ahead to ordinance and resolutions. I see that the first one has been deferred. So we'll go on to and I'm glad it's a short agenda. Resolution 24 2024 Dash 42 Development agreement between the City of Tarpon Springs and Moses Tucker Partners for the development of property located at 4498 US highway 19. And this is a legislative matter. Yes, Mister Chair, just real, very, very quickly. Renee is going to do the heavy lifting here, but I just want to let you know that you are here in the capacity as your local planning agency. According to state law. Development agreements are controlled under state statute as well as your own codes. State statute does allow local governments to adopt their own codes, but there are prescribed things that have to be in the development agreement. So we have reviewed that this we've worked with the attorney for the applicant for quite a while, and I think we've got everything worked out and with that, I'll let Rene take the take it over. Good evening. Rene Vincent, planning and zoning director. So this is development agreement number 24, dash 45. And this this board has seen several iterations of this along the way. This was started out just to kind of recap as just a land use map amendment to change the land use designation, which would allow as a conditional use outdoor storage on the property. As well as a little bit of additional floor area ratio. Ultimately, that did get approved by this board. But when the project went to and I'll go through the details of the project in a second, when the project went to the board of Commissioners, it was denied there. And really based upon the idea that even though there was a concept plan and there was an agreement between the neighbors and the adjoining property that the city didn't really have any way to enforce any of that. Moving forward. So to remedy that, the applicant proposed to do a development agreement, which is what's before you tonight. So this initially they submit the way the process works, a request to negotiate that goes to the Board of commissioners. They granted the request to negotiate. So then negotiations began by the city manager. They do the general terms are are negotiated. It goes through our technical review committee. It goes the general terms go back to the board of commissioners, which has already happened. So the next step then is to reduce it to a legal document. We do the public notices that are required. And then it comes to the Planning and Zoning Board and then back to the board of commissioners. So that's kind of in a nutshell. The process the property is located at 44 098 US highway 19 North. It's up all the way at the far end of the of the city limits. It's actually adjacent to Pasco County. The land use on the property is retail and services. Now, as a result of the comprehensive plan being adopted, which that it did amend, that land use designation automatically. The current zoning is highway business. And there, you know, it's about 6.7 acres and there's a 0.2 acre portion of that that is wetland and this is previously operated as a commercial driving range. So this is just the location. You have northern tool across the across US 19. The Brittany Park Townhomes, which are part of the discussion to the south. And then you have commercial warehouse uses in Pasco County to the north. This is the overall survey of the property. Notably, there is this 100 foot wide Duke power line easement that runs through the middle of the property. That does make things a little challenging for future development. As I stated in, there was a previous land use map amendment that kind of led us to where we are. The request to negotiate came in in March, and then in August of 2024, the board of Commissioners did agree to the development agreement terms. So I'm not going to read all of these into the into the record. The terms of the agreement are essentially, if you recall, there was a private agreement between Brittany Park Townhomes and the developer. And one of the things was that we were not a party to that agreement. This is a separate restrictive covenant that's part of the development agreement that gives us the same ability to enforce those terms. So all of those are in the actual development agreement itself. And the restrictive covenant was required by the city. So that there's a recorded document in perpetuity that recognizes those restrictions as well as the concept plan. So subsequently, you know, if this does get approved, then the applicant will have to apply for conditional use and site plan approval to bring everything to fruition. So this will come back to you. Yet again. Just the concept plan. We have one central entrance on the north side of the that Duke power easement. You have a proposed storage area on the northwest corner. An out parcel be on the northeast corner, stormwater drainage and the southwest corner. And then parcel A is an out parcel. And so the restrictive covenant puts restrictions on what can happen on parcel A. It limits some of the uses, the heights and some of the setbacks and things of that nature. And that is all she put in my application and my presentation. So, so again, this is before you this evening to review and take action on the resolution which adopts or recommends for adoption the development agreement with the exhibits of the concept plan, the actual restrictive covenant and the development agreement itself. So with that, I'll stop and answer any questions you might have. You know me. I always have a few questions. I just just to I think you said i, but we went through the comprehensive land use and this property would be consistent with what we had recommended for that property in the comprehensive land use. Correct. Okay, good. And the other question which you answered is that they would have to come back for a site plan approval. Yes. The one entrance, the dot, because I saw all out parcels will dot not allow. My concern is cut outs into the into the US 19. So it will have to be one for the entire property. Correct. Okay. And I guess that would be in the in the site plan. But if there that entrance there would be a decel lane. But that would be part of the site plan or not. That can be discussed at that will also require dot you know review as well since it's their right of way. But that has not really been discussed at this point. That's something that could potentially be discussed at site plan approval time. Okay. Okay. That's pretty much the questions I had. I don't know anybody else has questions. I have a question and maybe I missed it. I know it was in there that a wall slash fence would be put between Brittany Park and this area. And I my question would be, are we just talking. I think I saw eight foot, eight foot is eight foot tall wall and fence along the south property line, but wouldn't that be? I'm sorry, wouldn't that be in the site plan process? Let me finish. Okay. If okay. If they have done this. I mean, do we know where the planned wall and where the planned fence is, or is the fence going to be on top of the wall? I don't know. No, it's a combination of wall and the attorney can probably answer this a little bit better, but it's a combination of a wall and a fence. The reason some of it goes to fence is because there's wetlands along there. So you don't want to put a. Yeah, exactly. So it's a combination of wall and fence to, to buffer that that whole South property line. I was, I was hoping it was going to be a wall. I mean a, a stucco concrete block wall and well or something like that. Do you want me to answer? I well, first and foremost, I don't want, I don't want. We've got to be careful because this I don't want us to go far afield because this is with regard to the development agreement. A lot of these questions will be part of a site plan, approval. When we look at the site plan to see whether or not we will, we require what type of wall, what kind of landscaping, etc. That would be included in the site plan and keep in mind that those there's a private development agreement between the townhomes to the south. So their interests are going to be represented by their private agreement as well. So. Right. Yeah, I was just curious because it didn't articulate. Sure. What. Yeah. Maybe it'll be helpful if I, I mean, explain the concept of a development agreement. The legislature adopted that into statute in order to essentially for developments that may take or evolve over a number of years. And in order to give the developer and the city certainty about the rules that govern how this property is going to be developed, are laid out, generally speaking, in the development agreement. But as Renee indicated, there are a number of steps that they have to come back and go through and be evaluated under those criteria for a conditional use and site plan. But the development agreement gives them certainty over time that the rules and the laws won't change. As you know, things of that nature. So you will have an opportunity to get into those details at a later date. It kind of gives them vested rights. So things don't change moving forward. Thank you. Question. Yeah okay. So what the attorney for the applicants here. So why don't we go ahead. And so the detail is actually in the agreement about what the fence is going to look like. So on the concept plan which is sorry, Amy, Amy McPherson, 2200 Gulf Boulevard, Indian Rocks Beach, Florida. Here on behalf of Moses Tucker Partners and Frederick and Jane Mcclemans, if you look at the concept plan, exhibit A, and you look at the property line there where parcel A is, if you see, do you see the darker dotted line that's just inside the property line? Yes. That is where the location of the wall will go. And so the conversation with our neighbors and they're they're here, Brittany Park is here. Would be to place a wall that front portion US 19 back is where the residential building sits adjacent to us. So we'll replace the existing fence with a wall. It's exact location will happen once the arborist comes into play. There's some existing trees, so we'd like to be able to kind of maneuver it. And that's the conversation we've had with our neighbor to the extent we can kind of keep those and navigate that, that's that's our intention. And then once we get beyond their building, they have a detention pond behind them. And we have stormwater and wetlands. So the need to have a wall a we can't legally because of the wetlands. And B there just isn't a necessity. And we both want to be able to access that area behind for maintenance and cleaning and all of the things that we need to do. So that's how we arrived at this and that the exhibit gives you the language in the development agreement just says it, and then it points you to this exhibit. Right. Thank you. Thank you. Does anybody else being premature? I just oh no. No. Well it actually isn't because we did put that specificity and level of specificity is actually in this agreement and in the restrictive covenant that gets recorded against the property, so that any subsequent purchasers are aware of what that that restriction is and where that placement goes. Thank you. The board have any other questions? Yes. Just one counselor. Thank you. You have three players involved here. You have the you know, the developer. You have the property owners. And of course you have Duke Energy. So everyone is kind of in accordance with this development agreement basically. And everybody's aware of its stipulations. Yes. So both the developer and the property owner execute the development agreement, the property owner executes the restrictive covenant because legally they're the ones who owns and that binds any subsequent sales purchasers, developers. And then the reason we have spent so much time with all of you trying to get this plan approved is because this is kind of what we're stuck with in terms of the ability to develop, because of Duke Energy, stormwater and wetlands. So it really kind of determines where we can and can't. And I know there was a lot of conversation for a very long time because everyone's like, well, can't you just talk to Duke? And we're like, no, you don't understand. They're getting ready. And hence over the last two years, I don't know if you know what it looked like before, but what it looks like now, you can see they they came in large and in charge. So. And to your knowledge, is Duke finished with what they were? Our understanding is. Yes, they are. They are complete on our on our property. Now, wait. So. Thank you. I have a just a couple questions for Renee. I mean, it's my understanding that Duke doesn't have to agree to anything. They're just kind of do what they want, right? I mean, you know, I yeah, yeah, we have no control over Duke. I think they've done their homework with Duke Energy to know what they can. To me, that was never the issue with Duke. But no, I'm just is it premature to ask like what goes where then for like the commercial retail. Would that be for the site plan? I mean generally speaking, you know this the storage is already called out on the site on the concept plan. And that's in C for parcel C, B and A are to be determined. And then the restrictions really are on A as to what those uses can where they have the use restrictions. So with those restrictions for like 6 to 10, I think it was would they apply to those retail places too. Like is there going to be a gate? You know, I mean for I think that's somewhere that they would only use. Yeah. Public building I don't. So what is that. So the building you know immediately on the so there, there so those uses that are listed here cannot be on parcel A. They're oh. So they're excluded off of that. They cannot. Yeah. Parcel B does not have any real limitations on the uses because it's not butting up against other than what would already be in place anyway. Oka. Question I have another quick question, Renee. I'm looking at the diagram. You know, I'm looking on my computer and it has I'm assuming that the cross section is Duke Energy's easement. Is that right? Yeah. It's a it's a hatch. If you could I don't know if you can see this or not, but there's a there's a cross hatch that goes through the middle of the property here. Is there any is there any issue with Duke Energy in terms of ice boat storage on the easement and down a little further, it looks closer to 19. It looks like maybe parking there. In some instances, Duke Energy will allow parking underneath of an easement. Sometimes they won't. It's going to be up to them to get Duke Energy to sign off on that. Okay. Thanks. So quick question. How long or how. Yeah how long. How many years is development agreement effective for? Five. Five okay. Thank you. And one more question to the representative. Have you have you given due diligence to the wetlands and any perhaps anything that may come up with construction, you know, regarding your bordering or that that is part of your property, I presume? Yes. And as part of this process and this development agreement, the 0.2 acres that sit in the corner will will be back before all of you for land use map amendment to change that to preservation. But if you look it sits in that far rear corner. And so all of the development is away from that. Okay. So you've investigated that already okay. Yes. Anybody else? Okay. I do have one one question and I don't know who can answer this, but not too often do we see like a third party, whether it's a have a separate agreement as part of and there's a development agreement and then a third party agreement with with I guess the homeowners in our development agreement. Is there any language that we do to incorporate the even though they're separate agreements. But to incorporate some of the requirements that the that they have to follow or adhere to the third party agreement. It's not we have we have within the development agreement, there's another document that is a restrictive covenant that basically is the exact same thing. That is in. So it's incorporated. It's incorporated. It doesn't refer to their agreement. It's our own agreement. Okay. But but the language mirrors what it does. All right. That that's kind of what I was looking for. All right. Other than that, anybody else have any other additional comments before you vote? I would like just for the record, because we are required to do this, the Board of commissioners, it's been advertised, will review this on at their December third regular session, and it will be on the 7:30 p.m. Portion of the Board of Commissioners agenda. Mr. Chair, if you could also open it up for public comment, that's okay. Thank you. Thank you for reminding me. Is there any public comment? I forgot that one. In Smyrna, 925 Ozone Court, Tarpon Springs, Florida. We're in agreement with that. You said about five year limitation. What is that referring to? And they have five years to I guess get it all done. That's our development agreement limitation. Otherwise you have to go back to the drawing board. Right. That's the maximum is in your write up. What whatever the paperwork was that you agreed to that we incorporated. We're in agreement with that. It's not exactly like the very first one we started with. But you know, on our side, we were just concerned about noise safety. And that was really it. That's why it's only one story. No auto shops, nothing that will generate noise. The other side, we really didn't care about from what they told us. So we're we're totally in agreement. We have no issues with it. It's just that the process is very long. This one was unique. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, any other correspondence that received digitally or by mail or we have received nothing. Okay. Any zoo. So I'm going to close the public aspect of this and go ahead and see if anybody wants to entertain a motion. Mr. Chairma. 4 to 2 containing the application and development agreement discussed. Is there a second? I'll second that. Okay. The motion and a second. So roll call please. Thank you. And discuss. Oh yeah. There you go. It's been a while. I got a gavel, but I don't know what it means. I just wanted to point out, I mean, I am glad that this all worked out. It was quite the process. I mean, I think that they were in front of us, Renee, like four, 4 or 5 times and in front of the board of Commissioners twice. So not that it should always be this, you know, involved, but I think that it is really indicative and reflective of how it can go. And if somebody, you know, we shouldn't as a city and, you know, on the board and the BoCC, if we want something there, we should stick to it. And people that really want and clearly it's we did all want the same thing. It just took a little bit of time to get there. So I've never seen these agreements go all the way through. So I was a little bit worried when I would see it on the agenda. I thought that they were like kind of bypassing us. And so they're not they're coming back and then they're going to come back. And remember, Merle was said he was comforted by the fact that we would see them again for the site plan. So and that's still coming again. So I'm glad that, you know, it all worked out and that they stuck to it. So but again, I think that we should as a reminder to us and the BoCC that if we want something, you know, the people that they should have to keep, you know, going for it. Yeah. And it's a good example of things that people are looking for in it. So that's all that's any other comment or discussion? Okay. Now I'm going to call for call for the go ahead. Miss Weaver. I approve, Miss Swenson. Yes. Miss Earley. Yes, Mr. Rocklin? Yes, miss Francis? Yes, Mr. Chris Curtis. Yes. Okay. Moving on. Okay. Thank you. I guess that leads us to any board and staff comments. If or if anybody is interested, the city manager is hosting a main Street introduction meeting on this Thursday, the 21st at 6 p.m. At the Heritage Museum. So it's kind of to learn about the what what is main Street and what's what's possible. I don't you know, so just letting people know that that's happening okay. Anybody else comments for this evening. Wow. Not even a half hour. All right. And I usually have a lot to say but I don't tonight. So that being said I'll adjourn the meeting.