e e e good afternoon welcome to the May 14 2024 City bapka Planning and Zoning Commission meeting if you would please all stand with me for a moment of Silent prayer and the pledge amen I pledge flag theit thank in each section of the meeting tonight there will be a section for public comment for each agenda item if you were here for that particular agenda item then during that time you can raise your hand and be recognize and speak if anyone has something that is not on the agenda tonight would like to speak in front of the commission please be recognized now seeing none we'll move on approval of minutes meeting minutes from April 9th 20124 I make a motion to accept amendments from April 9th 2024 thank you commissioner Washington motion by commissioner Washington do I have a second second second by commissioner Ryan thank sir all in favor say I I I any opposed motion carries right item number one comprehensive plan element reite city of Apopka for the repeal and replacement of Transportation element of the comprehensive plan Mr out thank you Mr chairman uh as you'll recall the Planning Commission received a presentation at the March Planning Commission meeting from uh Pim rich and kimley horn in regards to the proposed Transportation element update uh tonight Mr Woodward from kimley horn is here as well as Mr Evan magley uh to discuss the repeal and replacement of the transportation element they have a very brief presentation for you all right well hello uh my name is Mike Woodward I'm happy to be back and as mentioned we're going to just have a summary today we were here not long ago and we went through in depth so um this is our second time for this Planning Commission after that we'll um meet actually tomorrow with with city council and then use use some input to finalize our documentation which we will then submit to uh the Department of Commerce which used to be Department of Economic Opportunity um they'll have a 30-day review period and then we'll go back to city council probably in July if we miss that then um might take longer and we'd be at the next meeting so uh the things that this update includes our data inventory and Analysis as well as some new goals and objectives and policies um we did get some input from this commission last time around as well as some input from the public and that's the the main portion that we'll talk about tonight so we looked at level of service we used uh existing year which was 2022 that's when the data was collected we looked at year 2034 and also at year 2050 most of the road way improvements all right most of them are extensions and widenings near the Kelly Park interchange area as well as the East shores area now the city improvements are are primarily going to be at intersections via Partnerships with uh with developers Partnerships with the state Partnerships with the county um and these will maximize the operations and efficiency of of the of the system as far as the goals objective policies we brought broke that up into three different primary goals one is a a resilient and connected multimodal system goal two was to look at the infrastructure and then goal three was the funding and capital Improvement plan some of the comments from this commission last time was um some of the language was set up um was a bit aggressive with with sort of converting people away from the single occupant vehicle so we changed a lot of that language we reworked it to be to have more emphasis on travel options and travel alter Alternatives rather than trying to be prescriptive or or or um have language that sounded like it was trying to force people to make other choices rather than that we just wanted to provide different Alternatives there was a question about how to improve deficiencies on State and County Roads and so I just wanted to point out that we broke one of the policies into a couple um to to Really highlight that policy 1.9.6 is specifically addressing this concern it says to address deficiencies on roadway segments under state County jurisdiction we will work with these agencies to increase capacity and improve levels of service there was a comment on potential new interchange and there's some specific recommendations and we ultimately want to include those separately there is a policy to to plan and and I I'll just go ahead and read it policy 1.2.4 has a sub bullet that says um to consider potential for new and improved access to 429 um but that's something that's such a giant change to the city that it really should be addressed separately and then if there is a new Interchange to to 429 um that would immediately be be rolled into an update and you could have a complant update just for that interchange but that's such a major undertaking that it should be addressed separately there we go uh we did set up a virtual room and it was advertised in a number of different ways and we had some comments that that have already come back and um as we get more comments we'll consider them prior to finalizing any of the goals and objectives some of the comments we've received so far are um just some were suggesting that the maps have different information or show it differently so that it's easier to make comparisons and so we certainly provided the guidance um or the information by fdot and the comp plan format is really not set up for interactive mapping um we do have gi files that we can provide to the city in the event that the city did want to move forward with uh any sort of gis-based web mapping of such things um there's a question about widening okoi Apopka Road from 429 to Kean and uh the city would probably benefit from that um and we have Provisions to partner with the county but because that portion is under County jurisdiction um we didn't feel like it was appropriate to show that as a widen facility in the future there's about widening or expanding Rogers Road and that's something that would probably be contingent on the development in the area so an extension or widening would make sense but it would have to occur as that area gets developed and that would really uh a study would would be conducted at that time to determine what the specific configuration of that road would be and again just to reiterate the process um we're going to present tomorrow uh just informational no action needed tomorrow then we'll come back June 5th for the final final transmitt or I'm sorry for the initial transmitt to the Department of Commerce and today we would just ask this commission to make a motion to recommend that city council transmit the transportation element to the Department of Commerce after that transmittal hearing and that concludes my presentation the end right does anyone have questions of the app I have a couple questions commissioner do so we talked and thank you for I was the one that brought up the single occupancy vehicle thank you for addressing that but I didn't see the updates to like policy 1.4.5 and 1.5.1 okay I have them here I can I can is that something we can see I'd love to see that so the version is over on the right and the updated is is on the left highlighted commissioner do need minute to study that we have somebody else do their questions and then you exactly that's a greata let me bring up one more thing real quick okay uh policy one dy. for we talked about sidewalks construction of sidewalks let me ask you a question this might be even better directed at Jim Mr hit but uh when I was coming up here tonight there was a a u vacant lot for sale on a popka Boulevard and if that gets developed say it's sold and somebody puts a house there are they going to have to build a sidewalk in front of their house that's not going to connect to anything else if it's actually in the city limits yes um there are quite a few properties on a papka Boulevard that are not in the city basically south of 10th Street um I talked with commissioner Moore about that before and she's actually talking to uh to her constituents there in regards to adding some sidewalks in the county portion and then we've got a couple different developments that are coming up in the U City Center that are going to be adding some sidewalks also but uh the whole idea is that we can't arbitrarily just put in a bunch of sidewalks because they just cost way too much so we do uh we do typically wait for the developers to actually do that development or uh homeowners whoever is you know building on those vacant Lots eventually they end up coming in and we end up do we end up do um adding in different sidewalks uh to give you an example uh east of forest uh Forest AB we ended up putting sidewalks all the way to Highland um just this uh the end of last year and we didn't have sidewalks there before So eventually we we do end up doing filling in some of the blanks well maybe this is something that should better be dressed in the Land Development code but again I just I don't see the value in forcing a homeowner to build a sidewalk that's only going to be in front of their property you know s to 10,000 of additional cost for nothing at least at this point and maybe for their duration of that time in that house I just don't agree with that so it it's something that Public Works takes care of so okay I'm I'll let me look at this and can all right I'll come back to you commissioner Ryan Yes um as I understand there's going to be about eight or nine red lights on Kelly Park Road and I was just wondering if it' be more that's more red lights than on Rox runs Road I just wonder if be more fishing to have a roundabout at Kelly Park Road and Mount Plymouth Road it seems to be laid out there for for a roundabout yeah I think Mount Plymouth it it does make sense there and I think that's far enough out to the east where if it does justify signalization or uh conversion to a roundabout that's you've got a decent amount of time a lot of the development is close enough to the inter interchange that um well that location is far enough away where it's less urgent than um some of the area immediately surrounding the interchange but yeah roundabout does make sense at that location I hope you consider that yeah yes thank you good comment I agree right anyone else have questions no all right commissioner Doom me you're up time's up pencil's down yeah uh yeah I see the changes you made here I'm not I don't I would say you're about 50% of the way there to make me happy with it but okay this is a collected board so I'll just uh vote with my conscience on that I just don't like the words in urbanized areas because what defines urbanized versus Suburban areas urbanized is basically the city Yeah so basically the entire city correct it's supposed to be Urban yeah so to me it's the same it's still it's just the change of herbage but it's still the same effect saying that inside the city we're going to promote non-vehicular travel and decrease vehicle miles traveling through development of mixture projects and by requiring vehicular and pedestrian interconnections between adjacent properties and by providing connections to available Transit facilities so we still have that words promote non-vehicular travel inside in urbanized areas it doesn't necessarily say reduce vehicular dependence but it's two two ways of saying the same thing yeah I I mean I'm as a transportation engineer I'm a strong advocate for connectivity of of roadways as well as uh sidewalks and and and Trail facilities I think it's very important to have connections for for people to get uh from where they are to whatever is adjacent and if if it's if you can avoid going out onto the main road to do that that's going to be a benefit so yeah I'm I'll be a strong advocate for the benefit of that okay I don't have anything else all right thank you commissioner sir thank you thank you is there anyone here from the public wishes to speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion and Commissioners I don't I don't think it's in the report but I just do recommend if you uh do decide to move this forward that you include in your motion uh that you find it consistent with the comprehensive plan oh okay I see there we got that okay we need a motion okay I I will do but I didn't catch that correction it needs to be I'm sorry it needs to be say it it's in line with a comprehensive plan like we normally do just in addition okay just in addition okay all right Mr um chairman I make a I make a motion to recommend approval of the ordinance number 3029 repeal and replacement of the transportation element of the comprehensive plan to the popus city council and find it consistent with the comprehensive plan thank you motion by commissioner Washington do I have a second second by commissioner Norwood all in favor say I hi any opposed motion Carri I'm I'm opposed oh I'm sorry one opposed motion carries good evening everyone my name is Amir Hamza I'm plan hang on one second I'm sorry item two yeah Mr chairman this would be for item two so if you want to go ahead and introduce the item for the record then he'll start his presentation for for the the first item or second the second item item number two you've already approved item number one under public hearings okay I need to sir just give me one moment I need to announce it for the record sounds good all right item number two ordinance number 3051 951 South Highland Avenue smallscale future land land use Amendment request approval of future land use map Amendment from residential ow to Industrial for 951 South Highland Avenue owners pav a lot asphalt maintenance company applicant Joseph Lewis uh location 951 South Highland Avenue all right go ahead sir your name and address for the record my name is Amir Hamza I'm a planner uh good evening everyone uh the applicant has submitted a small scale fature land Amendment from residential low to Industrial the property specific property is located on 951 South Highland Avenue just south of US 441 at West of South apapa buou part these are the vicinity and aerial maps of the 951 South Highland Avenue site the total Site Area is .57 acres and has a street Frontage of 200 feet on Highland Avenue the applicant is requesting the future Landers amendment to allow for the development of a storage Warehouse around 3200 ft which is permitted through a special exception in the mud mixed use downtown zoning that's for a later time uh the the maximum buildable area is 14,857 square fet for the specific property as mentioned before and shown on these Maps the future land use is residential low and proposed to change to Industrial as the to the west of the property um it is um industrial which would support the proposed change from residential low to Industrial and the zoning is mixed use downtown muud the development Review Committee has recommended approval the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the future land use Amendment subject to the findings and facts presented in the staff report and Exhibits all right hang with us here one second um does anybody have questions of Staff no no no all right thank you sir is the applicant here and do they have a presentation or would they like to speak uh my name is good evening my name is Lamar hugley I'm GC on the project I'm here to represent Mr Lewis and hopefully to answer any questions you guys have about the project great thank sir have question no no well thank you sir okay we don't have any questions all right thank you very much all right is anyone from the public here wish to speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion Mr chairman I I'll make a motion uh find the proposed change in the future land use designation from residential low to Industrial compatible with the character of the surrounding areas recommending approval of the future land use Amendment subject to the findings and facts presented in the staff report and Exhibits thank sir motion by commissioner Mt do I have a second second second by commissioner dumi all in favor say I any opposed motion carries I'm I'm sorry ma'am if you'd like to speak speak on this matter you need to come to the podium and give us your name and address good evening my name is Melissa Gomez and I reside at 335 East 10th Street and I just wanted to ask some questions regarding um the land use um from residential load industrial what type of um equipment is going to be put on this future land use here um because if it's a Paving Company to my understanding um I know that the roads are not very wide to be you know transporting from one into the other that was one question the other question I have is the 3 um East 10 Street ends there's the railroad tracks and then you continue on with West 10th Street is that ever going to be opened up for these um vehicles with Paving Company to be um going through that particular area will East 10th Street eventually turn into or combine with West 10th Street and if so we have a um 10th Street is not a very wide Street and I'm assuming that these uh vehicles that are going to be used and going to be storage there are are large so how is that going to impact the residents around the area speaking on South Highland and also for 10th Street okay um two separate questions there the the the first was about the the future land use this is early in the process and as far as the setbacks and the shielding and all the things that will go on the actual plan that goes there is a a more specific issue that'll be addressed in another meeting this is just to get the state to approve the change of the land use from one use to another as far as the streets and okay you had multiple concerns there as far as the streets that would be something that perhaps Mr hit could Enlighten us on if there's any intention of that um and then as far as the the traffic and that that will be something that go further on in the process but right now this is basically just approving the land use to be changed and then you have to have a specific plan what what's going to be parked there where it's going to be parked and then we'll we'll deal with that at that time but maybe Mr hick can address or help you with the street issue there sure real quick uh 10th Street won't get punched through because there's no actual Road right away between the properties to the north and or to the south from this one um in regards to the street itself uh we don't even look at that with land use time or zoning it that's that's done during the major development plan or or a development plan itself site plan and we don't have any uh site plan to even look at right now for for the use of the streets or turn Lanes or anything else okay and I'm assuming that um with this change that they're trying to do the taxes are not going to go up more because of this I mean I taxes for that property may go up we don't control taxes though right but it does not change property taxes for Neighbors um because I know that the the building next to um the 951 South Island I know that's a nursery so that's already industrial so yeah and just like you know just making sure that's that's why I was kind of consistent with the area what what's adjacent to it good point that's thank you and ma'am I would I would urge you to just follow the process and if you want to come and ask questions in the the following meetings about this particular property you're more than welcome to do so name and address for the record please okay my name is barara Ashley Jones and I own the property property on East St Street as well um I understand once the change the land use of the property from residential to Industrial our taxes will go up not may go up I know it will go up and also insurance will go up so is you moving the residential people you know from playing the residential taxes into a higher commercial type tax there I've been real estate for quite a while so I know the taxes will go up and not maybe the property the property taxes on this property may go up but that doesn't guarantee that they will go up on your property or any other property that are adjacent to it well if you change the land use it's not your land use that's changing it's the land use is only changing on the property that's that's part of for clarification then the land used as being show you real quick thank you it's only this property you're not changing your land use or anybody else yeah we aren't changing your land just yeah we can't change your land use unless you ask us okay I just want CL yeah I just need a clarification thank you so much anyone else like to speak I'd love to see the day that taxes and land use uh Insurance go down okay bring it back to the board for discuss we already we already had the motion you accepted yep yes [Laughter] what about a vote we did we did we did y she just wanted they wanted to speak they didn't weren't recognize during ordinance number 354 Investments Alliance LLC small scale future land use Amendment request approval of ordinance 3054 a future land use map Amendment from County Rural half to rural settlement for 218 Road owners investment Alliance LLC applicant ramal Fontana location 218 thank you Mr chairman for the recer Bobby how planning manager subject property is located at 2518 hos Road and it's approximately 4. 17 acres in size property is annexed into the city on March 20th 2024 the applicant is requesting a future land use Amendment from County Rural half which permits a maximum density of one dwelling unit per two acres to City rural settlement which permits a maximum density of one unit per acre with a minimum open space requirement of 35% uh clustering is encouraged but not required as you can see the parsels to the east that are in the city have the rural settlement future land use as well as to the Northeast as well well request to sign the future land use designation of rural settlements compatible with the designations of the surrounding property they located within the city Orange County Public Schools issued a capacity determin determination letter stating that this is a Dem Minimus um increase in nature that they would generate less than one student and the DRC recommends approval and the recommended motion this evening is approval of ordinance number 3054 uh staff and applicant are available for questions thank you do anyone have questions of Staff no commissioner Norwood it's encouraged but not required yes okay all right applicant here and do they have a presentation name an address for the record please sir good evening my name is Johan Abby I'm with Florida engineering group where the civil engineers representing the applicant uh 5127 South Orange Avenue Orlando Florida 32809 uh I'm here mainly to answer any questions you have we concur with staff's recommendation and we respectfully ask you to approve our request great thank you anyone have questions of the applicant yes sir no very well thank you sir anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for a discussion and a motion Mr chairman I can make the motion if there's no discussion I find make a motion to find the proposed change in future land use designation from County Rural one half to City rural settlement consistent with the comprehensive plan and Land Development code Inc compatible with the character of the surrounding areas recommending approval of the proposed change of zoning based on the findings and facts present the staff report and Exhibits recommend approval of ordinance number 3054 thank you sir motion by commissioner DOI do I have second second second by commissioner Ryan all in favor say I I any opposed motion carries right ordinance number 3055 investment Alliance LLC plan development PD rezoning PD master plan requests the approval of ordinance number 3055 change of owning from T transitional to PD plan development owners investment Alliance LLC applicant raml pantana location 2518 hos Road as this is quasi judicial I have to ask if anyone had a members of the board had X parte communication on this matter no sir no no all right Mr how uh once again Bobby how planning manager uh this is the companion rezoning ordinance to the case that was just uh recommended for approval it's to plan development uh the applicant is requesting the plan development instead of a conventional zoning designation on the property to allow for the development the site in accordance with the rural settlement future land use category of the comprehensive plan the PD master plan proposes a four lot subdivision with lot sizes ranging between 29,2016 Ft 35% of the site is open space and it's located between Lots two and three and it'll be on portions of those lots as I mentioned previous Orange County Public Schools indicated that this is a demous uh increase it'll generate less than one student in the school system the development Review Committee recommends approval the recommend a motion this evening is uh recommending approval of ordinance number 3055 uh resoning from transitional to PD myself and applicant are available for questions thank you sir anyone have questions of Staff or the applicant no thank you seeing none does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion Mr chairman I'll make a motion I'll make a motion to recommend approval of the change of zoning from T transitional to PD plan development and the master plan for Investments Alliance LLC thank you sir motion by commissioner Washington do I have a second second by commissioner Norwood all in favor say I I any opposed motion cares okay item five approve special exemption use permit to allow accessory dwelling unit in the rsf1 a residential single family estate zoning District owner is Margaret Bronson seawell applicant Margaret brons sea well location 232 tangle wild Street as this is quasi judicial I have to ask is anyone on the board had xart communication on this matter no no all right sir good evening everyone my name is Amir Hamza I'm a planner the applicant has submitted a special exception request to allow an accessory dwelling unit on the site located at 323 tangle Avenue just east of North Park Avenue these are the vicinity and aerial mass of the property the total area of the property is 1.54 acres and currently has a single family residence the property has a future land use of residential Vero suburban and has a zoning of rsf1 a residential single family estate District as shown on these Maps the applicant is wanting to build the accessory dwelling unit Adu for her elderly grandfather on her property an accessory dwelling unit also called a granny flat or guest Cottage provides complete independent facilities for one or more persons which includes Provisions for living sleeping eating cooking and sanitation it is located on the same parcel or lot as the principal dwelling unit and shall be subject to the required setbacks of the principal structure and may be either attached or to to attached to or detached from the principal dwelling here the list of special exception review standards the applicant must comply to according to the Land Development code section 2.5.1 G4 here's the S plan of the proposed accessory dwelling unit the total area of the accessory dwelling unit will be 994 s ft which is below the maximum allowed area 1,000 square ft for an accessory dwelling unit in the rsf1 residential single family estate zoning District the development Review Committee recommends approval of a special exception to allow the dwelling unit within the rsf1 residential single family estate zoning District subject to the exhibits and findings on the staff report the recommended motion for Planning Commission is to approve a special exception to allow an accessory dwelling unit within the rsf1 residential single family estate District um sorry zoning District subject to the exhibits and findings of the staff report just this is a obiously auxiliary dwelling unit that's nice um I'm just curious will this building be dependent upon a poka sewage and water um Services that's a question for public yes yes correct thank you Mr did you say that the kitchen in this dwelling unit uh it could have a kitchen in the dwelling yes but it would it's it wouldn't be represented as like a independent dwelling it would be part of the it could be detached or attached to the principal dwelling like no like it has to be someone for the the principal owner of the of the res of the property who lives there it has to be related to them it can't you can't rent it out to some individual stranger or as an apartment unit so it has to be a family member correct Mr hit we talked about granny colleges a couple years ago I thought there was an issue where you couldn't have a kitchen inside these granny Cottages there's there's there's no prohibition against this the the idea is that it's supposed to be an accessory dwelling unit that's independent of the other in other words they can't cook one you know cook in one house and then bring it over to to serve it it it can be independent okay it's more of a mother-in-law sweet yes right yeah that's why I was going to use as an example that thank you for clearing that up y anyone else have questions that very well is the applicant here and do they have a presentation can they answer questions for us hi my name is Michelle Bronson Su I'm here to answer any questions that you guys may have all right we have any questions of the No No all right thank you ma'am does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for a motion and a discussion Mr chairman I'll be happy to make the motion uh can can you put it back on the screen please you didn't memorize it no come on I'll start I'll make a motion to approve the special exception oh to allow an accessory dwelling the accessory dwelling unit uh approve a special exception to allow accessory dwelling unit within the rsf-1 residential single family estate zoning District subject to the exhibits and findings inside the staff report thank you sir motion by commissioner Dy do I have a second second second by commissioner M all in favor say I I any opposed motion carries item six approve a special exemption use permit to allow place of worship use in rce residential County estate zoning District owners go Ministry Corporation Inc applicant Joel R beer Brien ball PhD care of Marcy Chandler PE location west of 429 and south of Kelly Park Road as this is quasi judicial I need to ask has any board members had expart communication on this matter no no sir good afternoon Jean Sanchez with the Community Development Department this is a request to approve the special exception to allow place of worship use within the rce Presidential Country estate zoning District subject property is located at 4490 Rock Springs Road on the southwest corner of Rock Springs Road and Simon Avenue approximately 3.16 acres in size property has a future land use designation of residential estate and within the rce zoning District the subject property is the current site of an exist in place of worship that's been operational for several years according to Land Development Code table 422c a special exception permit is required for the place of your worship use in the rce staff hasn't found evidence in City Records that special exception use permit has been issued for such use on the subject property and because the applicant proposes to add 9,600 Square ft and Associate infrastructure to the existing facility a special exception use permit is required to comply with Land Development code so pursuant to uh the LDC buffer yards and type Stables the applicant has worked with staff to establish an alternative Landscaping plan for these Redevelopment and me and that should meet the intent of the Land Development code the applicant is required to comply with all other site design requirements of the LDC and and other standards um staff will ensure compliance with all our regulations and start standards at construction site plan review therefore the DRC recommends approval the recommended motion is to approve a special exception use permit for a place of worship in the rce zoning District staff is available for questions thank you Miss Sanchez anyone have questions to staff I do all right commissioner Ryan have you sir okay has all the affected parties been notified this within what 30 or 300 yard 300 ft yes sir we have received all the certified mail receipts from the applicant that they've been um sent out and we have taken pictures of the plaque or the placards and we've been sent the affidavits for both of them for all the public hearing notifications from the applicant thank you all right commissioner Washington there are um two existing buildings at least two buildings uh there already now mhm the applicant is looking to add 9,600 sare ft correct for an additional building an additional building that's right okay all right I guess we're not at the point where a a development plan would be submitted or approved they haven't submitted a construction site plan just yet not officially I think they're waiting for the special exception determination first okay all right good anyone else so missj is regardless of what you're saying you've gone through the records and did not find the appropriate so I did not we're kind of voting on two things or one thing combined um it's just one thing the special exception use um the construction site plan will be reviewed by DRC yes okay all right any else great thank M Sanchez is applicant here do they have a presentation okay your name and address for the record please good afternoon Marcy Chandler civil engineer for the project I do not have a presentation but I can answer any questions that you might have great have question that all right thank you ma'am thank you all right anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion Mr chairman i' like to make a motion to approve a special exception use permit for a place of worship in the the rce residential country estate zoning District subject to the exhibits and findings of Staff report thank you ma'am motion by commissioner Norwood do I have a second second second by commissioner Washington all in favor say I any opposed motion carries right on to site plans number one Marshall Lake Business Center major development plan request to recommend approval of the Marshall Lake Center development plan this is quaji DUIs so I have to ask as anyone on the board had any expart communication on this matter no no sir no well Mr how thank you uh Bobby how for the record planning manager applicant requesting approval of a major development plan for six buildings totaling 43,9 sare feet in area it's comprised of office warehouse and Self Storage uses property is located at 780 Marshall Lake Road is 6.43 acres in size surrounding area is all industrial uh just to the east of the property is the recently approved and open 451 Commerce Park and there's industrial uses all around the property the site will be accessed via two full access points located on Marshall Lake Road total of 13 137 parking spaces are provided on site storm Waters proposed to be discharged in Pond located on the southern portion of the site the development Review Committee recommends approval the recommend motion this evening is approval if you have any questions myself and the applicant Mr ERS is here since there's more than 25 parking spaces on there on this plaque um are there any are there two EV charging stations we just learned of that yesterday so two will be converted over to EV when we take the construction plans forward uh we'll have those two parking spaces converted over to EV uh we consulted with the building official and I know the City attorney as well uh that is a new requirement of the Florida building code thank you anyone else have question anyone from the public speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for a motion to discussion Mr chairman I make a motion that the development Review Committee approve of the Marshall Lake Business Center major development plan thank you ma'am motion by commissioner Norwood do I have a second a second second by commissioner Ryan all in favor say I I any oppos motion carries item two oh I I do want to mention this that the staff report did not have the owner and information on the here on the on the Marshall Lake Business Center was incomplete as far as having the owner and the applicants information on there um number two Plymouth serrento Apartments major development plan request the approval of Plymouth tento apartment's major development plan owners Peggy G Charlton trust Gary D Liv D Carlton living trust and Gary Carlton living trust uh Happy in engineering carolot class and PE location 750 and 922 Plymouth sarento Road M Sanchez I have the exper disclosures okay hang on second um oh you got you got me this is quas due discipline yeah so has anyone else had no okay no well I have um through social media I had some discussion with a affected party and I've turned over transcripts to uh Mr Bobby how to let the um developer look at him okay and commissioner Ryan I would just ask you uh do you uh feel that your Communications would any way Prejudice your decision this evening thank you all right Miss Sanchez Jean Sanchez with the Community Development Department excuse me this is a request to recommend approval of the pmus to rental apartment's major development plan the properties are located at 750 and 922 PM rental Road north of US 441 West of PM rental Road and East of State 429 it's approximately 13 acres in size the property have a future land use designation hdr2 meaning it can go Um can have a maximum density of 25 delling units per acre and it is within a PD zoning District established by ordinance number 3038 the major development plan proposes to construct 242 multif family units with a density of 18.55 dwelling units per acre the applicant has worked with staff to design the site to locate building bus and as well as other infrastructure like amenities and Recreation to ensure its compatibility with with existing adjacent uses the multif family development serves a as a transition from commercially intensive uses along 441 and ajacent to State Ro 149 to the existing single family uses east of Plymouth T rental Road proposed Ingress and egress are located on Pou torrento and on the southwestern portion of the proposed development at the intersection of Orange Avenue and 450 and 441 the applicant also provides enhanced Landscaping building buffer of approximately 100 F feet and a decorative fence from plet rental Road a dedication of a 30 foot wide rideway to the public is also provided along the project Frontage on PM T rento proposed amenities include a resort style pool deck Club room dog park recreation lawn fitness center Pet Spa conference room Works Space and outdoor grills in the centralized open space area Additionally the applicant offers a 6ot wide Recreation Trail surrounding the storm water pond with benches and other amenity equipment this proposed mdp is consistent with the master plan approved by city council concurrent with the establishment of the PD zoning District the drcu recommends approval the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the pus rental Road major development plan staff and applicant are available for questions thank you Miss Sanchez questions of Staff commissioner Ryan I assume there's going to be two EV charging stations yes sir we discussed that with the applicant and they will be providing that the construction site PL sub metal thank you anyone else I one thing this has been going on for a little bit and I think the last time if I recall correctly there had not been official approval for the exit on 4 41 did the state approve that whole process and because that was that was a right highly intriguing um opportunity there to go from a um you know to a complete four-way stoplight right it's my understanding the applicants still coordinating that with state agency but I'll let the applicant okay I'll defer that question or that thank you Jee Luke Classen happan engineering 2221 Lee Road uh commissioner you're correct there was coordination with cfx um we've already coordinated with them we submitted a survey for the area that is supposed to be conveyed to the city their legal team and their um General engineering consultant and surveying consultant is reviewing they actually have a meeting tomorrow about it but we've been communicating with them and coordinating for about the last eight months about that good that you get approval for that we hope that tomorrow we can get um final recommendation for the path forward uh and so we should have a lot more answers tomorrow but we're we have been coordinated yes anyone else have questions that they app I have a question commissioner wat so are we being asked to approve this development plan without knowing about the 441 that would that would come in a construction site plan anyway we can't we couldn't we couldn't approve it if it was different than that when it gets to back to DRC for the construction site plan and it's a condition of approval for the for the P for the zoning so it is required it's just and it's shown on the on the mdp plan so if there's any variations to that plan we would have to come back so it is required still okay yeah I think that I think that piece is very important because we had a long discussion about your project yeah you know and uh sounds like uh you along working with the city doing a great job of trying to make everybody happy and U it looks good thank you all right any more questions of the after thank you sir does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board commissioner Ryan would you like to share the information that you received on this before we vote no effect on my decision turn over to Mr Bobby how develop more than welcome to look at it well I'm just asking more for our edification what was your input from the residents well basically party basically just venting I mean you know she she state in in that neighborhood okay great so my question is why aren't they here tonight because last time this place was full with people around yeah that that I find it curious you did mention that you been I'm sure she would have yeah but there were others as well I I am very disappointed in turnout especially tonight my thought was you know we had this we talked about this last year and it seems like nothing's changed I mean what's different now the buffering is different is that different um because the big the big hold up last time was the traffic on plumouth sento as well as the 441 but it sounds like it's exactly the same now as it was last year well that was part of their frustration where they wanted to know why keep coming up in front of the plan commission why keep coming up in front of the um city council um and she she claimed she wasn't get enough information from the uh planning department that was that was most of the the talk that she had I mean it's per ofly fine I mean this this what they want to do with their land but uh last time we were told if we didn't approve it they were going to put a retail store there was a strong on possibility that we would end up being a retail store now we're back to where we were last summer yeah the the retail the retail was that that was not this property property to the north there was a threat last summer that we're not allowed to deal with hypotheticals we're only allowed to deal with right so we have to disregard that statement that it's hypothetical it's hype it was absolutely was hypothetic yeah correct this this the the the apartment project has been over the last year and a half almost two years now um there was a lot of talk in regards to the the the density itself so we did come and this is one of the things that the um a lot of people don't know the whole process and we explain it various times multiple times to multiple people is it besides the uh getting all the property together in order to figure out what the density could be or could not be um if you the first step is advertising land use and Zoning uh so you got to get the land use and Zoning done um that was the big step because it did have um a plan that went with it uh that it was not it's more of a draft plan at that point because we aren't approving it based on a plan but it does offer a glimpse of what it could be and it's a it also gives um the the boards a comfort level as to what to expect in the future this is now the future so it's the major develop plan because it's over 25 dwelling units per acre or 25 dwelling dwelling units itself is well over 25,000 Square fet so at this stage um your recommendation would be to recommend approval to the city council for the major development plan which it'll be going to to City Council next and after that then it comes back to the development Review Committee for all the final drafting of the engineering and the the the primary architecture everything else goes goes as part of the construction site plan and that's where we would have to have everything approved such as the the secondary entrance off of 441 along with the traffic light and any other requirements that that would be done um I do recall that we did point out during the land use and Zoning portion that U that the setback from the neighbors across the street in Plymouth landing I think was well over 160 ft or so from building to building from the road road itself it's about 130 or 140 feet so it's it's it's a it's a a lot farther than what's actually required by code they could have put the building almost right up to the to the road but they did not and that's why a use like this even though it's they could go by Senate Bill 102 and get 25s per acre the interesting part that uh that Miss Sanchez pointed out is that it's not it's not even 20an per acre although they could put it up there and try to cram in more parking and and and really take advantage of that but they are not so we didn't have something that was we didn't have a land use that was 20 dwelling breaker we have 15 or 25 so we don't have an in between there but most of the ones that uh we've got a few that were taking advantage of that or trying to get 25 D breaker but they can't most of them are sitting around 1819 dwelling is per acre even though they've got a 25 dwelling per acre maximum that's it in nutsh thank you just one minor question I had asked before that uh we all know that you have the post office on Plymouth frto Road also and that's going to be there I understand that but I brought out to the developer last time that there is a trailer that's U right next to the post office and I got like really I didn't know there was a trailer there so I'm asking a question now to so I have a question for the applicant applicant well if the tra if the trailers on the post office property that it we don't have anything to do with it but if it's on this property this is not it's not going to be there after we get done after they get okay that's what I'm looking for yeah so the trail is yeah the the the site itself takes into account that that property that's directly adjacent to uh to the post office there's a retention p on the North side in this there's basically parking in a dumpster on the back side on the western side of the post office and then uh mainly parking it's uh the main building or one of the main buildings is kind of caddy corner to the post office itself going to the Southwest yeah all right any more questions bring it back to the board for motion and discussion oh Mr chairman I'll make a motion to I make a motion to recommend approval of the Plymouth sento Apartments D major development plan right thank you sir motion by commissioner Washington do I have a second second second by commissioner M all in favor say I I any opposed motion Carri right site plan number three Park View preserve fav preserve phase two recommend approval of the Park View preserve phase phase two plat owners jtd land at Parkview LLC applicants PEC surveying and mapping care of David White location track fd1 Park View preserve phase one Mr thank you for the record excuse me this is a quasi judicial so is anyone had xart communication on this m no sir all right Mr how for the recer Bobby Howell planning manager this is the plat for phase two Park View preserve it's located on track fd1 of Park we preserve fwan subdivision uh which was set aside for future development it's for 78 Lots plat is consistent with the major development plan that was approved the construction site plan that was approved and with Florida statute 177 which is platting uh and our Land Development code and comprehensive plan development review rate committee recommends approval the recommended motion this evening is to recommend approval of the Parkview preserve Phase 2 plat uh any questions I would be happy to answer them thank you Mr how any I have questions of Staff no sir no all right is the applicant here they have a presentation nope all right all right so anyone from the public here wish to speak on this matter I'm G to guess that's a no all right bring it back the board for motion of discussion Mr chairman I'll make a motion to recommend approval of the Park View preserve phase two PL thank you ma'am motion by commissioner Norwood do I have a second second second by commissioner Ryan all in favor say I I any opposed motion carries right item four site plan Kelly Park multifam phase three plat recommend approval of the Kelly Park multif Family phase three plat owners dhic Kelly Park LLC Kelly Park land Investments LLC and Harris KP LLC applicants polos and benett care of guenav Labuda partial identification location northwest corner of Waypoint B Kelly Park Road this is quasa judicial is anyone here had expart communication on this matter all right Miss Sanchez for the record Jean Sanchez with the Community Development Department this request recommend approval of the Kelly Park multif Family phase 3 plant the subject property is situated on the northwest corner of Waypoint Boulevard and Kelly Park grow approximately 150 acres in size the plant it the plant create combines parcels and creates three lots roads and other infrastructure required for the construction of a multif family development this plat also serves to establish portions of Aries Spring Street fresh Flower Street and rainy Wood Street rights of Wass to support the expansion of and connectivity within the crossroads of Kelly Park development plat is consistent with the crossroads Kelly Park phas three multi family track major development plan approved by the city council on May 3rd 2023 and the construction site plan approved by the development Review Committee on June 15 2023 the DRC recommends approval the recommended motion is to approve the Kelly Park multif Family pH three PL staff and applicant are available for questions thank m s any questions no anyone have questions the any from the public wish should speak on this matter no bring it back to the board for motion discussion Mr chairman I'd like to make a motion that we recommend the approval of the Kelly Park multifam phase three plat thank you sir motion by commissioner M do I have a second second second by commissioner waston all in favor say I I any oppos motion we have any old business well I am old well that that applies to a lot of people here do do we we have old business yes okay that's new business that's new business okay all right the old business all right business Mr how so we want to take this opportunity to roast Jim I mean thank him for everything he's done I'd like to kind of give a little background about Jim he's originally from an Arbor Michigan go big blue big Michigan fan came down to his love of scuba diving the ocean and warm weather brought him to South Florida in the 1980s after working in various planning departments in South Florida he came to poka in 1992 after 13 years in a poka Jim left for the hills of Claremont however the altitude of Claremont and his love for apka brought him back here to be the community development director of apka back in 2016 now Jim is about to embark on the Journey of a lifetime retirement which for him will not include sitting in a rocking chair watching as the world goes by however he will be doing fun things such as scuba diving traveling riding bikes and attending his beloved solar Orlando Solar Bears hockey games Jim yeah we wish you all the best and thank you for all you've done thank you rob thank you thank you Mr hit you will you will be sorely missed absolutely I I I've said this when I got back in 2016 this Planning Commission is probably the most efficient Planning Commission uh that I had the honor to work with and uh thanks to all of you and your your dedication your time uh and you're you're worth every penny and more if we could pay you um but I just wanted to say thank you all for making it easy I mean I like I I I think I like plats the most because they it's just legal recordation of property but um but you ask good questions and and you're considerate and u i I just appreciate all of you too and uh kind of like what Bobby said you know I moved here in the uh I moved here here when I a week after we got married in ' 92 uh moved down here in like early ' 87 but um this has been our home for the last almost 32 years now and um it's it's been an honor to be a be able to be part of a Popkin and uh in your lives so thank you see you three odd guys or whatever Brewery place we get here in [Laughter] apka well thank you Jim and and part of the reason I think if we're efficient that's because you set up a system where it works fairly efficiently and you answer questions and I think that's a great credit to you that goes our staff the staff has been phenomenal to work with I I just well you're the boss so you got to take the beating sometimes you take the credit okay but but again you will be missed Jim we will all miss you and thank you so much thank you very much all right God bless meeting ajour e for