Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Research Facility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
University of Florida seeks zoning update for Gulf Coast research farm, requests relief from road and buffer conditions
Summary
The University of Florida requested a major modification to a 473-acre planned development to modernize research facilities, add lab/office space and limited graduate housing, and sought relief from conditions requiring long-distance road improvements and a continuous landscaped buffer along County Road 672.
The University of Florida asked the Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master on May 19 to approve a major modification to the Gulf Coast Research and Education Facility PD that would expand research and educational space and permit limited on-site graduate housing.
The university’s representative, Jerry Deidenbach, said the amendment would update a PD approved in 2003 to reflect current uses and the county comprehensive plan and would increase office and laboratory square footage and agricultural support facilities while allowing up to seven dormitory buildings for graduate researchers. “It is financially impracticable to think that the state university system or others would be able to improve 7 miles of roadway,” Deidenbach told the hearing master when explaining why the applicant has filed an administrative variance to a road-improvement condition.
Why it matters: The proposal affects a large, mostly rural site in southeastern Hillsborough County used for long-standing agricultural research and outreach. Approving the change would formalize expanded research and residential support uses that county staff said are consistent with the Balm and South Shore community plans and the county comprehensive plan.
Details and scope: The applicant described specific program and size changes on the 473-acre site: up to seven dormitory units housing a total of 64 student residents, 219,117 square feet of office and laboratory space, and 322,362 square feet of agricultural field support facilities — about 541,479 square feet of nonresidential uses in total. The PD already authorized research, laboratory and student housing; the modification would modernize those approvals and consolidate conditions.
Points of contention raised at the hearing: The applicant requested two clarifications/reliefs that staff said require administrative or PD-variation review: - Road improvements: Condition 14 in the staff report states improvements to County Road 672 “to the point of nearest connection where there is a standard road.” Transportation staff advised that language is standard for projects on substandard roads and that the applicant may pursue an administrative variance; the applicant said the nearest segment built to county standards is about seven miles away and that it is impracticable for the university to construct seven miles of roadway. - Buffer/screening on County Road 672: The staff report required a 20-foot buffer with Type B vegetative screening along the northern perimeter. The applicant said existing vegetation and a security fence are present in places and that power-line easements and other site constraints preclude providing a uniform Type B vegetative screen along the entire one-mile frontage. The applicant formally requested a PD variation for that portion of the buffer and said it will submit supplemental photographs and a narrative to support the request.
Staff and planning commission view: Development Services staff and Planning Commission staff supported the modification as consistent with the comprehensive plan and community plans, subject to the proposed conditions. Transportation review staff explained that the road-improvement language is standard and that completion of an administrative variance or design-exception process remains available to the applicant after this hearing.
Next steps: The hearing master closed the public hearing. As with other items on the agenda, the hearing master will file a written recommendation that becomes part of the record for the Board of County Commissioners’ decision. The applicant indicated it will pursue the administrative variance and supply supplemental materials related to the buffer variation.
Ending note: Project proponents emphasized the research and extension benefits of the facility; county staff emphasized that existing code requirements and standard conditions (including the five-year expiration language for general development plans) remain in force unless a formal variance or exception is approved.
