DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE, PASCO COUNTY, FLORIDA

A G E N D A

DECEMBER 9, 2004

 

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

Daniel R. Johnson

Assistant County Administrator

(Public Services)

Bruce E. Kennedy, P.E.

Acting Assistant County Administrator

(Utilities Services)

Bipin Parikh, P.E.

Assistant County Administrator

(Development Services)

Ray Gadd

District School Board of Pasco County

 

LEGAL COUNSEL

 

Robert D. Sumner

County Attorney

ADVISORY STAFF

 

Cynthia M. Jolly, P.E.

Development Director

Debra M. Zampetti

Zoning/Code Compliance

Administrator

Vacant

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

 

None Scheduled

 

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.:                  DR05‑232

Project Name:                         Pall Aeropower Parking Addition

Commissioner:                       The Honorable Steve Simon

Applicant:                                Pall Aeropower Corporation

Location:                                 On the south side of Ridge Road, approximately two miles east of Little Road, in the New Port Richey area, Sec­tion 30, Town­ship 25 South, Range 17 East.

Acreage:                                  53.86 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:         Parking Lot Addition.

Requested:                             Variance from Section 603.6, Landscaping and Irrigation, of the Pasco County Land Development Code.

RECOMMENDATION:            Denial.

 

b.                  Memorandum No.:                  DR05‑286

Project Name:                         B & B Strip Center

Commissioner:                       The Honorable Pat Mulieri, Ed.D.

Applicant:                                Grand Oaks Square II, LLC

Location:                                 On the southeast corner of the intersection of S.R. 54 and Pet Lane in the Lutz area, Sec­tion 14, Town­ship 26 South, Range 19 East.

Acreage:                                  1.17 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:         9,313‑Square-Foot Retail Building.

Requested:                             Variance from Section 603.9.D1, Landscape Buf­fering and Screening, Pasco County Land Develop­ment Code, which, if approved would allow a reduction in the required 10‑foot "Type A" site-perimeter buffers to 6 feet on the west side and 7½ feet on the south side to allow a required rear, fire-access sidewalk to remain.

RECOMMENDATION:            Approval.

 

c.                  Memorandum No.:                  DR05‑293

Project Name:                         Ferman on 54

Commissioner:                       The Honorable Pat Mulieri, Ed.D.

Applicant:                                Ferman Motor Car Company, Inc.

Location:                                 On the southwest corner of S.R. 54 and Oak Grove Boulevard in the Lutz area, Sec­tion 33, Town­ship 26 South, Range 19 East.

Acreage:                                  12.17 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:         69,187‑Square-Foot Automobile Dealership Com­plex.

Requested:                             Variance from Sections 306.6.H and 306.6.L, Minimum Interior Landscaping Required for Vehicular-Use Area; Section 603.9.D.4, Landscape Buffering and Screening of Landscaping and Irrigation; and Section 17.4.J, Outdoor Display and Sales of Large-Scale, Commercial-Retail Design Standards, of the Pasco County Land Development Code.

RECOMMENDATION:            Approval.

 

d.                  Memorandum No.:                  DR05‑300

Project Name:                         Scheer Commerce Center, Lots 44‑47

Commissioner:                       The Honorable Jack Mariano

Applicant:                                Scheer Commerce Center, Inc.

Location:                                 On the northeast corner of Scheer Boulevard and Craftsman Drive (Scheer Commerce Center in the Hudson area), Sec­tion 13, Town­ship 24 South, Range 16 East.

Acreage:                                  3.37 Acres, m.o.l.

Proposed Development:         Office/Warehouse.

Requested:                             Variance from the Pasco County Land Develop­ment Code, Sections 615.3.B.1, 615.4, and 615.5, Off-Street Parking and Loading and Unload­ing Requirements, to allow vehicles to back out of parking spaces and loading areas directly onto Scheer Boulevard.

RECOMMENDATION:            Approval.

 

e.                  Memorandum No.:                  DR05‑339

Project Name:                         Alumi-Guard, Phase III

Commissioner:                       The Honorable Jack Mariano

Applicant:                                William Woodard

Location:                                 On the north side of New York Avenue, approxi­mately 150 feet east of Omaha Street in the Hudson area, Sec­tion 23, Town­ship 24 South, Range 16 East.

Acreage:                                  10 Acres, m.o.l.

Requested:                             Variance from Pasco County Landscaping and Irrigation as follows:  1) East Buffer:  Sec­tion 603.9.D.1 ‑ shade trees 60 feet on center, elimination of continuous row of evergreen shrubs to allow the existing chain-link fence and existing ground cover to remain, 2) North Buffer:  Sec­tion 603.9.D.4  ‑ eliminate the required 110 shrubs to allow the existing chain-link fence and existing ground cover to remain, and 3) West Buffer:  Section 603.9.D.2 ‑ allow existing ground cover to remain.

RECOMMENDATION:            1) East Buffer:  Approval of the request to install shade trees one per 60 feet and utilize the existing ground cover, supplementing it as needed; denial of the request to eliminate the required continuous row of 24-inch-high evergreen shrubs.

                                                2) North Buffer:  Approval of the request to utilize the existing ground cover, supplementing as needed; denial of the request to eliminate the required 110 shrubs.

                                                3) West Buffer:  Approval of the request to utilize the existing ground cover, supplementing as needed.

 

                                    Pages:  1-44

 

V.                  APPEALS

 

A.                  Class I

 

                        None Scheduled

 

B.                 Class II

 

                        None Scheduled

 

C.                 Class III

 

None Scheduled

 

D.