DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE, PASCO COUNTY, FLORIDA

A G E N D A

DECEMBER 5, 2002

1:30 p.m. - Historic Pasco County Courthouse, Board Room, 2nd Floor,

37918 Meridian Avenue, Dade City, FL 33525

DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE

John J. Gallagher

County Administrator

Michael Nurrenbrock

OMB Director

Douglas S. Bramlett

Assistant County Administrator

(Utilities Services)

Daniel R. Johnson

Assistant County Administrator

(Public Services)

Bipin Parikh, P.E.

Assistant County Administrator

(Development Services)

LEGAL COUNSEL

Robert D. Sumner

County Attorney

ADVISORY STAFF

Cynthia M. Jolly, P.E.

Development Director

Debra M. Zampetti

Zoning/Code Compliance

Administrator

Ronald G. Lewis, P.E.

Development Review Manager

Samuel P. Steffey II

Growth Management Administrator

James C. Widman, P.E.

Engineering Services Director

Representative of the Clerk

of the Circuit Court

I.

OPENING

II.

ROLL CALL

III.

MINUTES

August 8, 2002

Pages:  1-30

October 3, 2002

Pages:  1-23

IV.

VARIANCE PETITIONS

A.

Public Hearing

Proof of Publication

B.

Variance Review

The Development Review Committee may grant a variance from the terms of the Land Development Code when such variance will not be contrary to the public interest; where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this code would result in unnecessary hardship or where improved or alternative technology would meet or exceed the development and construction standards set forth in this code.  Such variance shall not be granted if it has the effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of this code.  Furthermore, such variance shall not be granted by the Development Review Committee unless and until a variance application is submitted demonstrating compliance with one or more of the following:

1.

That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structures, or required subdivision improvements involved, and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or required improvements.

2.

That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties with similar conditions.

3.

That the actions of the applicant did not cause the special conditions and circumstances which necessitate the variance.

4.

That the granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this code to other lands, structures, or required improvements under similar conditions.

5.

Through improved or alternative technology, the development and construction standards set forth in this code are met or exceeded.

6.

The Development Review Committee finds that the requirements of this code have been met based upon the review and findings of the Development Review Services Department and information presented at a public hearing.

7.

The Development Review Committee further finds that the reasons set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance that would make possible the reasonable use of the land, buildings, or other improvements.

8.

The Development Review Committee finds that the granting of the variance would be in harmony with the general standards, purpose, and intent of this code and will not be injurious to the surrounding territory, or otherwise be detrimental to the public welfare.

9.

The Development Review Committee finds that the granting of the variance would not violate the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan.

a.

Memorandum No.:

DR03-076

Project Name:

Marinelli and Mertins Variance (VAC02-017)

Commissioner

The Honorable Pat Mulieri, Ed.D.

Applicant:

Frank Marinelli and Warren Mertins

Location:

South side of S.R. 54, approximately four-tenths mile east of Oak Grove Drive, Sec­tion 33, Town­ship 26 South, Range 19 East.

Acreage:

0.96 Acre

Requested:

A variance from Sections 8 and 10 of Ordinance No. 02-04, Landscaping and Irrigation.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval with added conditions.

b.

Memorandum No.:

DR03-297

Project Name:

Meadow Pointe III, Parcels FF and OO

Commissioner:

The Honorable Pat Mulieri, Ed.D.

Applicant:

Meadow Pointe Partners

Location:

On the east side of the proposed Meadow Pointe Boulevard, approximately 3,300 feet north of Strick­land Road, Sec­tion 34, Town­ship 26 South, Range 20 East.

Acreage:

83.973 Acres, m.o.l.

Requested:

A variance from the Land Development Code, Sec­tion 602.7.C, Type I Permit; Subsection 1, Required Minimum; Subsection 2, Credits Against Required Minimum; and Subsection 4, Percentage of Trees in Common Areas.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval with conditions.

V.

APPEALS

A.

Class I

None Scheduled

B.

Class II

None Scheduled

C.

Class III

None Scheduled

D.

Class IV

None Scheduled

E.

Consistency

None Scheduled

VI.

PUBLIC NOTICE AGENDA

A.

Proof of Public Notice

B.

Class II

1.

Memorandum No.:

DR03-290

Project Name:

Cypress Creek DRI, Phase 1, Infrastructure

(Continued from the November 21, 2002, Development Review Committee Meeting)

Commissioner:

The Honorable Pat Mulieri, Ed.D.

Location:

On the southeast corner of the intersection of S.R. 56 and I-75, Sec­tion 26, Town­ship 26 South, Range 19 East.

Acreage:

147.63 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:

To regrade the site and install infrastructure.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval with conditions.

2.

Memorandum No.:

DR03-291

Project Name:

Leeds S.R. 39, Phase 1

Commissioner:

The Honorable Ted Schrader

Location:

On the west side of S.R. 39 and on the north side of Fig Road, Sec­­tion 25, Town­­ship 26 South, Range 21 East.

Acreage:

8.07 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:

To construct a 10,282-square-foot building expansion and a loading dock.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval with conditions.

3.

Memorandum No.:

DR03-292

Project Name:

Rt. 41 Manufacturing Truss Plant

(Continued from the October 17, 2002, Development Review Committee Meeting)

Commissioner:

The Honorable Pat Mulieri, Ed.D.

Location:

On the east side of U.S. 41, approximately 100 feet south­east of Greenfield Road, Sec­­tion 33, Town­­ship 24 South, Range 18 East.

Acreage:

9.85 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:

To construct a 25,200-square-foot truss manufacturing plant.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval with conditions.

C.

Class III

1.

Memorandum No.:

DR03-298

Project Name:

Meadow Pointe III, Parcels FF and OO

Commissioner:

The Honorable Pat Mulieri, Ed.D.

Location:

On the east side of the proposed Meadow Pointe Boule­vard, approximately 3,300 feet north of Strickland Road, Sec­tion 34, Town­ship 26 South, Range 20 East.

Acreage:

83.973 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:

The developer is requesting preliminary plan approval for the division of 83.973 acres into 133 single-family lots.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval with conditions.

2.

Memorandum No.:

DR03-305

Project Name:

Sabal at Wyndtree

(Continued from the October 3, 2002; November 7, 2002; and November 21, 2002; Development Review Committee Meetings)

Commissioner:

The Honorable Ann Hildebrand

Location:

On the north side of Mitchell Boulevard directly across from Davenport Drive, approximately one-half mile east of the intersection of Mitchell Boulevard and Seven Springs Boulevard, Sec­­tion 34, Town­­ship 26 South, Range 16 East.

Acreage:

19.57 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:

The developer is requesting preliminary and construction plan approval and Stormwater Management Plan and Report approval to divide 19.57 acres into 61 single-family lots.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval with conditions.

VII.

REGULAR AGENDA

A.

Class II

None Scheduled

B.

Class III

1.

Memorandum No.:

GM03-129

Project Name:

Long Lake Ranch Future Land Use Element Map Change

Commissioner:

The Honorable Steve Simon

Location:

South side of S.R. 54, approximately 1« miles west of U.S. 41 and 1« miles east of the Suncoast Parkway, Sec­tions 27 and 28, Town­ship 26 South, Range 18 East.

Acreage:

329.9 Acres

Proposed Development:

Change of land use from RES-3 (Residential - 3 du/ga) to ROR (Retail/Office/Residential).

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval of the change to the Future Land Use Map to the Local Planning Agency.

C.

Class IV

None Scheduled

D.

Utilities

None Scheduled

VIII.

CONSISTENCY DETERMINATIONS

None Scheduled

IX.

DISCUSSION

A.

Discussion of Policy Issues

None Scheduled

X.

INFORMATION

None Scheduled

XI.

NOTED ITEMS

A.

Class I Development Actions

None Scheduled

B.

Class IIIE Development Actions

None Scheduled

C.

Class IIIR Development Actions

None Scheduled