LPA recommends denial of land‑use change for 13400 Pine St. amid density, traffic and brownfields concerns

The Pinellas County Local Planning Agency on Oct. 8 voted to recommend denial of a map amendment (FLU25.09) that would have changed an 18.43‑acre parcel at 13400 Pine Street in unincorporated Largo from Residential Urban (7.5 units/acre) to Residential Medium (15 units/acre).

Scott Swearingen, long‑range planner, told the board that the RU designation currently allows a range of residential and limited nonresidential uses, and that RM would raise allowed density from 7.5 to 15 units per acre. Swearingen noted the parcel’s history: a 2004 map amendment and development agreement had previously allowed up to 207 multifamily units for an affordable housing project; that development agreement expired and earlier special‑exception approvals also lapsed. Staff estimated the RU→RM change could add roughly 627 daily vehicle trips (about 55 AM and 70 PM peak hour trips) and said there are unresolved compatibility concerns; staff therefore recommended denial.

Katie Cole, attorney for contract purchaser Bel Air Development Group, argued the county’s comprehensive plan encourages intensification and mixed‑income housing outside coastal hazard areas and said RPD zoning and an RPD master development plan would address compatibility, buffering and traffic. Cole noted the property’s prior approvals and said the parcel recently received confirmation that it would be eligible for the state’s Live Local designation for affordable housing, and she emphasized that any redevelopment would require remediation and potential brownfields funding.

Residents speaking against the request emphasized traffic on feeder roads (Ulmerton, Vaughn, Wilcox) and local streets, the presence of a nearby affordable housing project under construction, the parcel’s former use as a construction and debris landfill (brownfields concerns) and backyard flooding reported by some neighbors. Marva Perry, a long‑time resident, said she opposed a second adjacent high‑density affordable complex and urged caution: “We don’t want two high density affordable housing project back to back.” Gloria Blaine said she has experienced water in her backyard and opposed dense redevelopment without road improvements.

The board debated and first voted on a motion to approve FLU25.09 — that motion failed on a roll call. Members then moved to recommend denial based on staff findings; the motion to deny passed by roll call. The Local Planning Agency will transmit its recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners, which is scheduled to hear the item on Nov. 18 at 6 p.m.

Swearingen and the applicant both noted environmental and infrastructure issues would be addressed later in the process: any redevelopment would require either an RPD master plan, type‑2 approvals or, for an affordable housing Live Local project, an administrative path depending on statutory parameters. The denial from the LPA means the County Commission will receive a recommendation to deny; proponents or the applicant may still pursue further action at the commission level.