Skip to main content
Pasco Countymeeting record

PDD-22-7543

Published agenda

2 appearances between Dec 9, 2021 and Jan 11, 2022, at 2 boards.

OutcomeApproved by the Board of County Commissioners on Jan 11, 2022
Approved Staff’s recommendation.

Official title

Zoning Amendment (Consent) – Outlaw Reserve MPUD Master Planned Unit Development – Outlaw Ridge, LLC - A Rezoning Request from an A-C Agricultural Zoning District and a PUD Planned Unit Development to an MPUD Master Planned Unit Development to Allow Development of a Maximum of 38 Single-Family Detached Lots on Approximately 58.69 Acres – No Funding Required

On a calendar

Dec 9, 2021 → Jan 11, 2022 · click a mark to jump to that appearance

Every appearance1 of 2 are in a recording

Each appearance carries the official title above. Where the county’s wording changed, the change is marked: added and removed. Steps with no marks were worded identically.

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 74% of 47 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong. 1 of the 2 appearances are not in any recording, so what was said at those is not here.

  1. 1
    Planning CommissionPC11Public hearingNo disposition in the minutes

    Zoning Amendment (Consent) – … Rezoning Request from an A-C Agricultural A-R Agricultural-Residential Zoning District and a … on Approximately 58.69 Acres – No Funding Required

    Open this item →No recording
  2. 2
    Board of County CommissionersP81Public hearingApproved
    Approved minutes

    Approved Staff’s recommendation.

    Open this item →
    8m
    StarkeyChair

    Item P eighty one, I already stated the um the pub, but I'll pay say it stated again. It's published in the Tampa Times on November twenty-fourth, twenty twenty-one.

    Unidentified speakerVoice A

    Good afternoon, Tammy Snyder, Planning and Development.

    We have Outlaw Reserve M Pvd, P D D twenty two seventy-five forty-three. Here's a location that is um It's adjoining Outlaw Ridge. Um and we have Tampa Bay Sporting Clays directly to the north. And the trail that you speak of is directly to the east, abutting these properties. And proposes a rezoning request from an AR agricultural and a PUD Plant Unit Development

    to an MPUD to allow the development of a maximum of 38 large rural single-family detached lots ranging from one half acre to one and three-quarters acres on approximately 58.69 acres. Also requested are variations from the land development code 901.6.d.11 Interconnect, 901.7 and 901.8 bicycle and pedestrian facilities, 700 subdivision and platting standards, 805.6 restrictions on

    post-development wetlands, and 905.2 landscaping and buffering. And here is their proposed master plan.

    And this project is within the CPEV overlay in a low density, meaning two units per acre residential area.

    The subject property is located in Central Pasco, abutting air and cutoff on the east side, approximately one mile south of State Road 52. On October 17, 2000, the BCC approved a residential PUD for Outlaw Ridge. All four subject partials are currently vacant. And the PC heard the item at the December 9th, 2021 meeting and unanimously voted to recommend approval to the BCC. Bell DC specifies that variations from the code may be reviewed and approved by the PC and

    the BCC during public hearings. Variations shall be allowed where the BCC specifically finds in the particular case that the proposed variations meet or exceed the intent of this code. The PDD has reviewed the requested variations noted and found that they do meet the intent of the code. The proposed request is consistent with the PASCO LDC and with the applicable provisions of the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan. And with that, we recommend approval with conditions.

    StarkeyChair

    Yeah, can you just throw up that map for a second and then I'll make have someone make the motion to approve. Um the trail. It's

    Unidentified speakerVoice B

    problem.

    StarkeyChair

    No. And you know, when I first saw it, I thought it was the other one. So it's it's my mistake. But it it it it would right, but

    Uh it would be good if somehow there is some kind of quarter that's so that people can one day get to the trail that's gonna be right behind it. Um you see where those lines are? That's the Orange Belt Trail. And that is a major trail for the county. So with that, if anyone wants to make a motion.

    Fitzpatrick

    I have a question. And this is thinking long term in the future. Is this septic or sewer? Septic.

    Question is for future? If we're going to have to convert all the septic to sewer later on, will they be responsible or are we gonna approve new septic and then the county has to cover the cost to upgrade their septic to sewer, just in general.

    Like a general question.

    County Administrator

    So I can attempt that.

    Fitzpatrick

    This is just general question.

    County Administrator

    The the the areas where we're really focused on subject to sewer are those that impact either the watershed or the gulf. is not I mean, there are septics all over East Pasco County that we're not inclined to connect to sewer at any time in the in the future. And so I think this would be one where, you know, assuming the soils can sustain suit septic for a long time, probably will be septic for a long time.

    Because we're not looking at every subject system in the county connected to sewer.

    Unidentified speakerVoice C

    And I'll I'll add on to the administrator's comment. So Mm-hmm. This project would only have to convert if a non-pressurized line was within X number of feet of the lot.

    It's developed at half half acre. Minimum, yes. Minimum half acre lots. It's unlikely that w as the administrator said, it's unlikely that we would provide service. to a develop unless they were having failures that that Um to a low density project

    Fitzpatrick

    like that. But the county wouldn't wouldn't end up being responsible. The rest of the county wouldn't be responsible is basically my question. So

    Unidentified speakerVoice C

    No, the generally it is the homeowner's responsibility to connect if we run a line. Past them that's non-pressurized.

    Fitzpatrick

    Only concerning, so motion to approve.

    Unidentified speakerVoice C

    Well um

    Moore

    okay. We'll start keeping with our distance if we can with these motions. We it.

    MarianoVice Chair

    Thank

    Moore

    you.

    StarkeyChair

    But Commissioner Oakley's comment.

    MarianoVice Chair

    I w I was just gonna ask M Madam Chair w what I mean, I'm not sure exactly where the line is, where the connection would be or what you want for verbiage in that to make that concern.

    StarkeyChair

    Uh well, see where it says hideout trail. On that picture? The the trail most likely, I mean we're we're in a route study, uh that is part of the Orange Belt corridor. that's um and that's I think that's Swift Mud property there. And um that that's I think where we hope to have it. But the issue is and I'm Glad you're asking this 'cause I and I don't know what happens in our staff meetings, but Sometimes we ask to reserve right of way for roads.

    But Some I think we need to be a little bit more than a little bit. asking maybe if we could get s some uh easement or right away so that we can connect. large populations to the major trails. So I I'm not pulling up my map in the area right now and I I get that the orange belt is under its route study, but I'm hoping our planning department's looking at the big picture and And protecting the public's ability to access the

    trails.

    MarianoVice Chair

    We'll leave it to the resident commissioner.

    Moore

    Well the the she already made a motion, so I'll I'll second it. But this is definitely compatible with with the area.

    So it's uh it's definitely something they've been working on for a while. So I'll definitely support

    StarkeyChair

    your mic soft. So we had a motion and a second. And all those in favor? Oh wait. Aye. I'm sorry, under discussion, Commissioner Oakley has to be.

    MarianoVice Chair

    Does that include the recommendation by Commissioner Starkey? Well

    Moore

    you said it as a cadet, so

    StarkeyChair

    I feel like that ship has sailed. On this, maybe there's an opportunity on the property to the north. Is that the sporting place to the north? Perhaps the county? Maybe we can work on getting some kind of easement there. Um I mean we only need how wide is the trail?

    County Administrator

    But

    StarkeyChair

    we need to feet ten feet.

    County Administrator

    We need to finish the route study and have the board adopt the route study so we know where we want the property to be. And that's in process. Yeah,

    StarkeyChair

    and that's why I think that's

    a good thing.

    There's that too. Um so so my statement's kind of a gen general statement. Uh So I mean it's to the detriment of these people. No doubt. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Um P

    StarkeyChair

    eighty four.