All right, we will bring the planning and zoning commission meeting for March 12th to order. We'll do the invocation of the pause allegiance. Dear Lord and Heavenly Father, thank you for this day, Lord God, thank you for everything you do for us. Lord, please ask that you watch over our citizens, our first responders and our city staff. Lord, thank you for everything you do for us. Lord God. May we disagree, but not disagree. Be disagreeable, Lord. In Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen. Amen. Ledge, allegiance. Allegiance. United, United, states of America into The republic for one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Alright, roll call Chair MNE here. Vice chair forges. Here. Member Keller. Here. Member Williams. Here. Member Crocker. Here. Member Sheol. Here. We have a quorum. All right. All right. Consent agenda. Can I get a, a motion for the minutes of the February 13th meeting? I'll make a motion to approve. I got a question on it before, before we go forward on the minutes, can you tell me what my concern was about when I asked you a question on the concern? What my concern was? I don't have that in front of me. What page? No, it says on which, which item? John? Page three says, uh, crocker made a, uh, asked a question on a concern. Mayor Crocker inquired about the height limit for the proposed project. Can you tell me what that is? Oh, Probably the Townhome, the town homes. Yeah. Whether or not it was exceeding the 35% and whether or not there was a variance required as part of the land use plan. Like if the land use plan was setting a building height up taller than the building height for the rest of the residential zoning district. And I had responded that the land use plan has capped it at 33 feet. 33 feet. Yeah. But then the, the height was 35. Yeah. But my question is, it doesn't state that in here. So that six months from now when you decide to leave and somebody comes back and looks at this, how are they gonna know what the, what was addressed? There's audio recording of the, of the video. Oh, there was a recording. It's also, yes, sir. And there's also Videos. Well, video. There's a video. Yeah. Yes, I know there's video, but Yes, sir. We, our, our minutes are not done by verbatim. Okay. In summary. Okay. It's stated in s 33 feet in the land use plan. So that's how it rides until there's another hearing to Change. Yeah. 'cause I asked a specific question so that if something did happen Mm-Hmm. And they came back and said, oh, here's the new plan. 45 feet. Oh, no, no. The land use plan that the City, yeah. It was the staff report that had reduced the height from 45 feet to 35 feet maximum. And they were 33 feet. 33 feet, right? Yeah. Mm-Hmm. It's, it's stated on the land use plan itself. And that's the document that we will receive the city stamp. Okay. Well, I just wanted to make sure that if something did happen, you know, to both of us, then It's recorded. It's, It's recorded. So you'd have to go back and look at the recording. Okay. Alright. Cool. Thank you. So, I have a, a motion? Do I have a second? I'll second. Great. We have a motion to approve the minutes by member forges by Vice Chairman Forges and a second by Member Williams. Let's go ahead and vote. Oh, I'm sorry. He made the motion. Oh, well, yeah, I'm, yeah, I made the motion. Okay. I'll change that to Member Keller made the motion and, uh, member Williams second. It. We still approved it. Yeah. Okay. All right. Uh, discussion. So this is the presentation of data inventory and analysis for the city's 2045 comprehensive plan update Zoning Manager Whitfield. Thank you. Lemme just start off, Mr. Chairman, just, this is a, going into today's meeting, we didn't have any projects teed up with a public hearing, quasi-judicial action required. And it gave us an opportunity to hijack this meeting, which will either shorten future meetings or not required an extra workshop. So, uh, with your work, with the comprehensive plan update, uh, we have given you a, uh, Planning 1 0 1, a planning 1 0 1, and what the comp plan is, what its purpose is, how you update it, why we update it, how you, what it's facilitating. Uh, so this is the first step of the comprehensive plan update. We go back and look at what, what it said we were gonna do, and we look at where we want to go. Primarily, much of that is driven by the population. And so we were gonna show you, uh, uh, the data and analysis that goes behind, uh, goes into the future comprehensive plan. It'll give you an understanding of what we found, what we wanna change, uh, level of service wise, potentially with, uh, transportation, with, uh, um, drainage, drainage with water and sewer, uh, level of service and parks and recreational level of service. And so, um, we will need to touch on this again, when we're in the public hearing for transmittal. Uh, but we're gonna give you the overall review of it so we can skim through it and remind you at the next meeting when we're actually going over specific goals, objectives, and policies that we're gonna ask you to review. We'll give that information to you ahead of time and then discuss it. And then we'll be asking for recommendations on those. So this gives us the opportunity, uh, we need to include these meeting minutes when we transmit it to the state, but we, but we're gonna also talk about the data analysis as well, kind of, so that we've talked about it twice. 'cause this is, this meeting is, doesn't meet the criteria. We would have to open it and have a public hearing, continue the public hearing until we bring that other stuff back. So we're just using this as sort of like a workshop to give you the background. So a notch is gonna go, there's, he's gonna be playing planner, transportation, planner environmentalists, water and sewer engineer, drainage engineer, parks and rec guru and, uh, and the like. So we'll do the best we can to answer your questions and take it There. Yeah. Thank you, Mike. Um, and I also wanna add to that, that, um, this is done in-house. I think Mike had mentioned that before. So the compilation of data that you were, you'll be seeing tonight is, um, based on the work of our Parks and recs department, our CRA administrator, our utilities department, and public works. So, and development services, of course. So everybody is pushing in in terms of their specific expertise. Um, and then they are actually the ones and our floodplain manager, um, compiling the data, coming up with the analysis and coming up with the recommendations, um, that you'll see later on. Mm-Hmm. So, so, um, I don't know if you've seen it before, but this is the front cover of what our current comp plan looks like. And you'll see that the adoption date is October 1st, 2002. So what that means is that that's 1990s, late nineties data. Um, this is the current, um, elements, the list of elements. So it just runs the gamut of what's required and listed in Chapter 1 63 of the Florida statutes. This is just element by element as it shows up on the, in the statutes. Um, number one through eight has been there since the 2002 adoption. Number nine, which is schools came about in 2008 with the public schools facilities requirement of the 2005 bill, and then the more recent property rights element. So we are, um, taking a fresh look at how we want our comp plan to be. So grouping them, instead of just listing all the elements and whatnot, we are trying to paint a picture, a vision of what we want the city to look like and how we want it to grow. And sort of reorganizing those various elements into, um, chapters. And the titles of these chapters essentially stem from the 2017 year evaluation on appraisal report that was done with public, um, input, um, way back then in 2017. So we had, like Mike said before, we never transmitted the ear, but looking at that document and the public, the matrix that has all the public comments, at that point, it was grouped into these focus areas that the citizens were concerned about. Mm-Hmm. So for vibrant and attractive, um, I'm sorry, for future line use housing and neighborhood preservation and recreation, we clustered that under achieving a vision for a vibrant and attractive and inclusive community. Um, in terms of infrastructure, you can't glorify and make infrastructure that pretty, so it's just sitting its own chapter for infrastructure. Um, we are taking a closer look at each of those sub elements. And then equally important is mobility. So instead of having the, the transportation element, we're moving towards the Mobil mobility element. And it's also sitting in its own chapter, um, and looking at land use and transportation, how they coordinate with each other, and how they create connectivity to the surrounding land uses. Um, chapter five is just combining conservation, which previously was an element by itself. And then natural resources protection, which was under, uh, infrastructure under aquifer and natural resource protection. So we felt that it would probably work better to be in its own part of an environmental protection chapter. And then all the other stuff falls under governance, like schools and intergovernment coordination, the capital improvements element, um, and property rights. So you saw this old cover, our urban designer, who's not with us anymore. We worked together and developed this cover, which the intent here is to capture an aspect of each of the elements. And then we have color coordinated chapters, so that when someone is flipping the pages, when they pick up a the comp plan, they simply have to look at the color and see that you know, what chapter they're in and which elements would apply. Um, also important, that's going to be a big ticket item for us, is that the current comp plan is like this thick and is all, is because it includes the data and analysis and a lot of stuff that probably needs to float elsewhere, like in the engineering standards manual. And so we'll have a document that is just a data and analysis that isn't adopted, and then the gold subjectives and policies document that would be adopted. So if we need to update our data, we don't have to run that through to the state. Um, in terms of how each of those documents look, they'll still have the same cover. Um, the titles will just be different comp plan, um, data analysis document instead of just the, the gaps. Um, and they'll also be coordinated by the same color. So when you look at the two books, you can match them together by the chapters. So going first into chapter two, which includes the future land use housing and parks, like Mike said, we took a deep dive into population. Um, first off, we looked at the city in terms of the census data from 2000, 2010 and 20, and then the 2022 July 1st estimate. Um, and then we compared ourselves to the county as well as our Sister Cities, winter Garden, Maitland, and Pop Veto and Castle Berry. I picked those simply because they're almost the same geographic size. Um, and as you can see, we are pretty comparable to win a garden and Apopka in terms of our population, annual growth, and our overall jump from, um, census, um, from census this year to census this year. So you'll see actually, we have grown quite a bit. Between 2000 and 2010, a growth of 46%, and 10 to 20 was a growth of 94%. So we are continuing to grow. So looking at that number, if we were to extrapolate just that annual average of 1145, we will be looking at, uh, in terms of a linear projection, 74,900 population, which is okay. I, yes, Go ahead. I was gonna say, do you want me to wait till the end or No, no, no, no. Ask question down there. There are 40 slides, so I don't want you to Oh, no, no, no. Yeah, I wouldn't remember question. Is it a percentage of the base year, which you're using 2000 or percentage of the previous year? The, I'm sorry. The previous year. Okay. Yep. That was your question. Yeah, That was it. Okay. All right. Mm-Hmm. Um, Did the percentages look strange to me? That's, Yeah. It's, it's, I'm sorry. From base year as we grew from 2000 to to 10 and then to 20, um, Let's see. So you'll see between 2020 22, we almost doubled our population. Um, we also took a look, took a look at the, um, population potential based on the maximum build out of each of the vacant feature line use categories. And that was one of the methods that was used in the current 20, uh, 2002 comp plan. Um, looking at just those land use categories that are specifically residential, uh, we have about 256 acres of low density, 12 ac uh, five acres of 12 parcels, five acres of medium, and 61 of high for a total of 197. So the, these columns here, um, is based on converting those acreages based on the maximum for each category, and then using a persons per household of three. Um, the three for low and medium comes from the current comp plan. And then the 2.96 also comes from the current comp plan for a multifamily development. And that brings us with a potential population of just another 6,100 people based on just what's vacant, which is actually pretty small. Question. Yes, Sir. You said the, uh, projected per household is from the current comp plan, The rate Mm-Hmm. The rate. Now, has that demographic changed? We looked at that and, and, um, so census has us at 3.33 right now. As of the, as of 2022. Um, Shimberg has us even a little bit higher. Um, the data that utilities is using in conjunction with the Central Florida water inventory is a, is more comparable to the three and the nine, the 2.96, they're at 2.98. So the, the ratios are, are slightly different depending on the source. What about Bieber? The Bureau of Economic? Um, they're comparable to what, I think they're at the three. Yeah. 2.97. 2.9. 2.77. It's between 2.9 ish to three, so it's hovering around there. Okay. Thank You. Mm-Hmm. So, um, the, the footnotes at the bottom is what would the population yield be? So the 48,198 people, that's where we are as of July 1st, 2022, based on census data. And then adding the 61 13 to that yields a population of 54,000, um, 300 at 2040, uh, I'm sorry, not at any time period, but just adding the population based on unit capacity. Um, and then doing that same formula, if we were to apply the high density 16 units per acre across the board for all 100, um, 97 parcels, we would be at 63,700. This has no bearing on the 2045 projection, is just basically the, the land acreage times the unit per acres, times the ratio. Um, the next data set that we looked at, this is information from our utilities department. They use, um, since this, uh, I'm sorry, they use, um, parcel data and their parcel data projects out all the way to 2055. But we, I just closed it here at 2045. Mike, you gonna say something? I'll wait for, yes. Okay. So in the utilities projections, they look at parcel data for their water utility service area, the city boundary only, and then also the joint planning area boundary, which includes both city properties and enclaves, which are unincorporated areas. And then projecting that out. Um, because we anticipate the future goal is to annex within our JPA, we are looking at that JPA number of 74 3 72. Mike, You had, so I was gonna say, so with the, going back to the other table, that's current city of Ocoee land, that's vacant based off the land use, not everything in the JPA Correct. This, then I want to point to you, um, 'cause we don't, so there is other lands that could be in the city that's not shown in that table that gets you the 6,100. That's just our current in the city limit with the land use. Yep. This table, when it says water utility service area, just so you can visualize, we don't serve above Clair Kona Co Road and we don't serve below Moore Road on the south or Roberson. But those lands are in our JPA and and are in the city, but they are served by Orange County. So when the utility department provides u population projections for just the utility service area, it's everything south of Clair, Kona and north of that just Yeah, they, but they, they look at it three ways. But I just wanna tell you that what that water utility service area comprises. Yeah. So when you, when the element in its completeness comes back to you, they'll have these maps that shows the geographic boundaries of the service areas for water reclaimed ander. But when looking at your, when looking at your population growth maximum build out, so is that saying in the low density Right. Which is houses, right. We only have a hun uh, 68 lots left in the city of OCO at 85 acres. Um, unincorporated. Yeah. 68 acres, 68 parcels at 85 Acres incorporated in, in, in the city left. And then, so there's really only two areas left for medium and high density, like 12 parcels at like 61 61 acres left for high density. Yes. That's what's in the city right now, right? Yes. That's what I'm talking about. Bringing anything in from Orange County, bringing anything from That's correct. jpa is, that's, that's what we have left. Yes, It's in here. Thank you. Um, this is, so our urban designer who designed our cover sheet and all of the templates, she, I had asked her to do a vacant land analysis and she went from the north side of the city to the south side of the city, looking at all of, on aerial, looking at all of the vacant parcels parcel by parcel. So in our support data, there's like a long massive Excel spreadsheet that shows the parcel ID number, the acreage, blah, blah, blah. And so it's, it's filtered through parcel data going on the map. Cool. Um, another resource that we looked at was the, um, from the perspective of transportation. So this long master table is, um, from our cons, transportation consultants, Kimley Horn. And what they did was use the central Florida regional planning model, um, the most current version. So, uh, from 2015 to 2045. Oh, another thing too, that's changed and you'll see a focus on 20, um, 34 maybe, depending on if we adopt in 2034. Um, because the statutes was recently updated to acquire a minimum five year still for the capital improvements element, a minimum 10 year planning horizon, and then a 20 year planning horizon. So it's no longer just the five and the 20, it's now the five to 10 and the 20. Um, so the first column is just unedited model, has no specifics really. The second column is the model, um, edited to include all of the city's currently vested projects. So anything that already has a site plan approval or, um, has been issued a permit, but not yet under construction. So all of those projects that are currently in the queue have been added to that second column. The third column is including using the model, but adding in the persons per household conversion. And this is just, I, I can't explain too much about this 'cause it's more of a transportation related analysis that was done, but then I also asked her to look at it based on, um, the persons per household. Um, for some reason in our transportation element, they have, we have a 3.03 for single family persons per household ratio and a 1.72 persons per household ratio. And then in the future line use element, it's for whatever reason, goes to 2.9 and three. So, um, the, that's the columns four and five. And then column six, she just included shimberg, just as you know, something else to compare. And then seven is, I had just made the decision to just do it based on the future line use element, which is the three and the 2.96, which more closely mirrors what, um, Bieber is, is showing in terms of projections. 'cause the census at 3.33 is, is probably a little high. So we are keeping it at the future line, use our current future line, use that, um, ratio at three for single family and 2.96 for multifamily. So that's the background. And then she grew it out, um, from 2015 through 2045 every five years. The table that they have, um, that they will include in the mobility element has it for all years. I just asked her to condense it for five years for purposes of our population projections. And you'll see that the growth rate, um, is based on the, the model, the regional planning model model. Uh, so it's not just a straight application of one percentage growth, um, during those five year time periods. So based on column seven, we're looking at a population projection of 74,541. And I'm gonna, the last, the last population slide will have all the numbers in one group. So you can see it. Yes. Uh, going back just a minute for that. Sure. Just for consistency, sounds like the annual growth is not from 2015, but it seems to be year over year Is 2015, are you talking about Yeah, so the 3.3, 2.4, 2.0 1.8. So it seems to be based on the prior year or the prior five years recording. It's a project. It's, so those aren't, um, past growth trends. So everything from row three onward or if on row three down are projected growth trends based on the regional planning model for transportation. And it's also based on trips. It looks at the network, the road class that is, um, that's in the city and also the land use, existing land uses that are around those areas. And also the future land use designations around those areas. So all of that is also is already built into the regional model. Right. So, so it is, it is an annual growth. It's not based on 2015. So the, there's no number for percentage on the, in the 2015 column, uh, I'm sorry, row. So between, from 2015 to 2020, the regional model based on the persons per household went from 3.3% growth in that five year increment compared to column seven, which is a 3.6% growth in that five year period. Mm-Hmm. Okay. Thank you. Mm-Hmm. Um, we also looked at Bieber, um, and then another source, and this is the reason why, um, the, uh, the Florida statutes in 31 77 section one, it spells out that the city has to look at permanent population and seasonal population that we have to look at Bieber, which is the standard. Um, and also looking at the, um, data from the Office of Economic Development, economic and Demographic Research, which run almost line in line with Bieber. Um, EDR and Bieber do not have city data. They have county data. And so we have to just make an assumption of what our city's population is based on a, a percentage certain. So in 20, in 2000, for example, there's the county population and then the Bieber census population. And when you divide that by the county, it yields a number. So using that number projecting forward is just us assuming that we retain the R 3%, uh, ownership of the county's population. So we looked at Bieber numbers, we looked at EDR numbers and EDR numbers. Um, for medium for us, compared to the county, we are very close to Bieber. So still hovering in the mid-low 60,000 range. So this is all of the numbers put together. So you've got the vacant lands, the Bieber, E-D-R-J-P-A service area, the regional transportation model, a linear projection and shimberg. So I didn't put a table on Shimberg in here because it's, it's a lot of, a lot of rows. So, but Shimberg had us projected at 79,000, which I think is, is quite high. So we went with the median, um, at around 74,000. So because, um, I feel like the transportation model is more fine tuned, we we're gonna go with the 74,005 number. So that population, 74,541 is the one we're gonna be asking you to agree with and recommend part of our recommendation for the transmittal. You'll be agreeing to that future population. And that will be the, what we're playing all of our other activities and elements off of that population in the 74 thousands. No decision needed today. You're gonna see this again, you're gonna see it with our goals and objectives. Um, but you can see we've, we've looked at it, uh, Bieber is the, uh, official population projection. They do it at University of Florida, bureau of Economic Business, something off census years. They are the official population projection. So every September we get their notice as of April, what their projection are, and they use, what they use is they actually work with all of the utilities and go by active accounts. They have their whole method that they get this statewide. So we have a chance to look at the numbers and I go through and crunch on how many cos we had and, and make sure it all lines up. But, but they are the odd census or the ENS years, they're the official population number for the cities and counties in the state. But this does not include the live act. Live local. Yeah. No, live local act. No, no. There's so Back, so the population could be actually 10%, but more than, well We've, we've kind of that the live local act, um, we, that's what some of these other ones assume that in commercial. So in the one table, she said for just the residential land. Yeah. What, and she just said that's just a, that's, that's not one of these Yeah. It's just residential only. Yeah. In commercial land you can have some, and industrial, you can have some density. Yeah. We don't know what those mixtures would be. And, and so, uh, those are caked in, baked into some of these other numbers. Okay. But not in that one table. She did, because she just showed you just residential. I mean, there's No, we just became, you know, we wanna be Mayberry, RFD, we don't want any growth. We're just stopping. That's what you're gonna get. Right. So there's really no way to project that. The, it's baked, it's, as I said, it is in these others, it assumes that in the, the utility, the JPA water service area, the transportation, transportation, linear, that, that, that accept it anticipates that. I mean, you could have living, you could have a commercial and then a four, you Know? Right, right. So for instance, the, uh, transportation, if you go back to the transportation slide, the second one with vested projects, that includes the Regency, which is an office land use and has 300 something units in it. So we have a lot of the includes Lake Lata, which has commercial and residential, and that's all in a commercial land use. So these other ones have those considerations in there. Okay. Mm-Hmm. But we're gonna also get to how we're gonna get to that number as well. I'm just trying to, and right now we're four dwelling units, eight to eight to 12 to 16 for land uses, Up to four, up to eight, up to 16. So we're gonna look to change that. Yeah. That'll kind of tell how we're getting, also, I won't be around in 2045, but I mean, it's just, I'm just trying to figure out how, how long it would take me to get from my house to here, given the Yeah. Yes. We don't have the flying car element yet. That's, that'll be coming up in the 10 year mark. When Was the last time you guys did something like this In the, well, so in the full comp plan, 2002. In 2013, we did an year. We actually did, we spent a lot of, some money and some staff time doing what's called an ear based amendment. And in there we looked at the comp plan and we came up with some criteria, some elements we were gonna change. And it, it was, at that time we were, we were ki we were doing it. 'cause we had to, but we were still just coming off the downturn in the economy. Nothing, you know, uh, we were holding signs out on the street looking for permits. So we really, it wasn't a good time. We didn't know what we wanted to be. Okay. Right. We didn't even do the downtown yet. Right. We haven't had that downtown master plan. So we submitted, we transmitted this ear based, these ear to the state, and they said, we understand what you're doing, but you know what, why don't you just hold off? You can just write a letter. And they gave us a letter to write. And so we ended up changing it, not adopting or not going forward with that ear. Okay. And so the answer is, we haven't done anything, but we didn't, we haven't had to. We tried and we talked to the state, they said, you know what? We understand what you're trying to do, but actually for right now, why don't you just adopt this letter and work on this? And then things started rolling in a co e and we just, I put that on the back burner because it's like, okay, we know what we want to be, but what does that mean? I mean, we haven't, I still have people that are fighting back then and now. And so now we've, we've got the momentum. We know what we want to be, we know where we've done some character areas. Okay? Uh, we've, we've, we've changed zonings, we've accepted that we're gonna be a bigger city along the interchange character area where a Coe village center is the business character area, plant street, character area, the CRA target areas. So we're, we're ready to com uh, accomplish this now. So now giving, Giving this new approach, um, I know every time we go to variants, you have, you must meet four criteria, this, that, or the other. I'm assuming there would have to be some changes to that too, because That has nothing to do with the, the comprehensive plan. That's a land development code. Okay. We are simultaneously doing a land development code update as well. Yes. That is, I'm just saying, most of this has may not be applied for that kind of growth that we, That variance is statutory that'll stay the same. But what's happens is, if you go back to when we gave you this background, when we come up, when we transmit and adopt this comprehensive plan update, we're gonna have to amend our land development code, okay. To facilitate how we're gonna get there and how we're gonna facilitate these level of services. So you don't have a book, which we're gonna change for, okay? Yes. Mm-Hmm. Alright. So for instance, right now, parks level of service is so many acres per thousand people. Yeah. We're gonna change that. Okay? We're not gonna use that criteria. Okay? And so now we do in our land development code, when you do a subdivision, you got this menu, you've gotta do this many amenities, and now it's gonna be different. We're gonna tailor it to facilitate the comprehensive plan. Makes Sense? The cool thing is, right now a notch, and I and lavonne are the only ones know what our comp plan probably says with this update. As Anat said, all the staff members, they all have buy-in because it's, it's almost their element. They understand their element. So no more of this comp plan that's just this rusty book on the shelf that we pull out. When we wanna run developers off, everyone will know. And when they go to do, when parks and Recs goes to do, uh, their budget time, they can say, well, this, uh, this inclusive park, this, uh, uh, for, uh, what's the one we did for, uh, The skate Park? No, the one with the, uh, autistic park. Yeah. Or whatever these elements, tiger. This is facilitating what we said we want to do on our growth plan. That's why you need to approve this, or that's why you need to start funding this. Yep. Okay. And that we'll get information on parks. There's, there's, there's, there's, uh, surveys that were done. There's stuff to based and baked into that. So, okay. So we haven't been twi doing nothing on purpose, Lou, we have done some things. We have adopted the, the elements we needed to adopt statutorily the year would've been somewhat of a change, but we went a different direction. Understood. Okay. So that was the future line use element, essentially the population projections. Now we're on housing. So housing, this is a table that, um, I assembled using the data from the decal decennial us, US census data, um, which Shimberg also uses. And in 2020, what that data shows, um, is that we had a total housing unit of 16,495, but out of that 96% were occupied. And then by, um, the housing units were occupied. And then there was another 3.9 that were unoccupied. And so what's interesting is that the census in s shimberg provides a breakdown of which ones are owner occupied and which ones are rent occupied. And then for the vacant ones, they split it off into rented but not occupied. Um, uh, or sold, but not occupied. And then also some for seasonal population. When I looked at our current 2002, um, comp plan, as far as seasonal population, it was under, I think the number stayed consistently at 4 44 as a projection. So even if we were to assume a 1000 person seasonal population is really not gonna have that big of an impact for us in the next, you know, 2045 time period. So Miranda went through this long exercise, this long effort. She went back through from 2000, uh, I'm sorry, from 2002 up to 2022, which was when she left me, I think. Um, so she pulled all of the permitting history for single family permits and all of the permanent history for multi-family permits. And so for single family, between that 20 year time period, there was 6,049 permits that were issued. And then a 1,373 permits for multi-family that were issued for a total housing unit, um, of 742. So when you add that 74, 22 number to the 84 0 5 number, and that number is from the existing 2002 comp plan where that inventory was done for that comp plan, we have a 2022 popula, uh, housing unit of 15,827. So this is 2022 number. And then we also have the 2020 number. And as you can see in terms of the occupied units, assuming that the permits issued got occupied, um, it's pretty close. So, um, it, the, the number that we came up with for housing inventory also took into consideration those, um, one offs where a housing unit was demolished and then rebuilt. So given that slight, you know, what is it? The, um, standard deviation, standard area devi deviation, um, it still is roughly about 15,800 residential units that we have in the city based on our 20 20 20 22 population. Um, we have a housing demand of 14,474. Again, that's based on a three persons per household for a single family and a 2.96 persons per household for multifamily yielding a a surplus of 1,353 dwelling units. So it has a negative there because I use the word deficiency in terms of housing deficiency. So if a deficiency is negative, it's essentially a positive 'cause it's negative times negative is positive. Um, and that's based on the 2022 population of 48,198. Oh, I'm sorry. That's based on 3.33. That's census data. The 3.33 is based on census data. We'll use the three and the 2.96 later on as far as projections for housing, Um, again, just off by 32 units. So this graphic, um, this chart shows the population for every five years based on the transportation numbers for population that we looked at earlier in the other element. So in terms of projected housing demand, this is where we broke it off. Um, in the current comp plan, um, the average of the percentage of single family to multifamily is 90% and, um, 20%, I'm sorry, 90 and 10 based on, um, so in, in the 2002, roughly 90 ish percent is single family, and another 10 ish percent is multifamily. Looking at it now, in 2020 numbers, we are looking at a shift to a slight increase in multifamily. So it went from 90 something to 81.5% for single family and 18.5% multifamily. Mm-Hmm. Um, so then we just grew out the population based on the projected population from the transportation model. And then I showed the percent change and then applying that 81.5% for single family, um, at the 3.0, and then 18, um, 0.5% at the 2.9. So we are projecting to have a demand of 9,105 units through that 2045 time period. So this next couple of little clicks is going to show that even this is a table from that you just saw from the future land use element, that if we don't plan for, um, increasing densities and, um, encouraging more mixed use at the higher densities, we will not have the capacity needed for the housing demand that we expect to have. So a popular, uh, housing demand of 9 1 0 5 with a projected capacity of 2005 leaves a need exceeding capacity. So even if we were to do the, again, applying 16 units per acre across the board, we would still be short about 3,900 units. Okay. That was housing. Um, the other things that is not in here, but 'cause it's not essentially data related, is, um, it's more going to be of a narrative matter in terms of our housing inventory, um, the stock, like the age of it, and the need for addressing missing middle housing or housing diversity, things like that, so that we can target all of our, um, income brackets, um, and age ranges. You know, we, if we want to encourage our young people to graduate and come back, we have to give them opportunities for housing that are within their, their income bracket. You know, so I know my sister is, uh, making six figures and she can't afford a house. Um, so it, it's housing is more and more of a challenge that not only we are facing, but the county as well. So next is recreation and parks, or parks and recreation. Um, still in chapter two, still focusing on creating that attractive community. Um, one of the key features of an attractive community is the landscaping, the, the horizontal scape, whether that's trees or shrubs or amenities, places for people to recreate, things like that. So Ginger's, this next series of slides on parks and recreation are prepared by Ginger. Um, she has, uh, a great deal of data here. I'm not going to like go through all of it, but what she is showing here is that she looked at, she and Mark Johnson and Dan Abdo. They, they did a complete inventory. They looked at the methodology of the current comp plan and the methodology that they're wanting to use. Now. They took, um, they took a look at the different park types that the city has, and they've come up with a shortening that list of park types from seven to six. Um, like, we don't even know what an ornamental park is, so that's going away. Um, then they also looked at the previous inventory in the comp plan, and they literally spent months inventorying every park in the city, the amenities inside each of those parks. And ginger even had them counting the parking spaces at each of those parks just to get an idea of what capacity of residents or visitors our parks can accommodate. So based on that inventory, um, in terms of developed parks, we grew from 11 parks at 94 and a half acres to 20 parks at 246 acres. That includes the cemetery, which, you know, a lot of communities, um, consider cemeteries as a place, as a place where people can go and just sit and contemplate and maybe just enjoy serenity. So it is recreation in its own right in terms of passive recreation. Um, so total parkland increased by 174, almost 174 and a half acres. Um, but in terms of the methodology, she's, the park staff are, are taking it the next step further in terms of not just acres per thousand, which is what our current comp plan is now, but actually looking at the, um, service areas for those parks. How well are our parks being distributed across the community so that we're looking at the 10 minute walk, the quarter mile, the half mile, two miles, and so on. So this is the map of our current parks. Um, I, I am sorry that the map is so tiny, but unfortunately our city is linear and not square, so it's, it's harder to fit that into the slides. Um, so, um, what they looked at was all the parks. So this map just shows all the parks. This map shows the different park types by, um, radii. So the green ones, it's so hard to see, I apologize. So these little green ones are a quarter mile radius. The blue ones are a half mile radius. The orange ones are a one mile radius, and then the purple ones are a two mile radius. So she wanted to see, and so she, our GIS staff has been very instrumental in creating these maps for us and creating these buffers. Um, just looking at what makes the most sense for, for CO and how we want to grow two miles is what they stopped at. Because two miles is what the schools use for the walk zone. The walk radius for students to walk on a pedestrian route to the school safely. So this map only considers a circular buffer. Um, the next step is to look at what are the physical barriers in that two mile radius or that half mile radius that would prevent someone from accessing the park. So a park may be in that half mile, two mile, one mile radius, but they can't get to it because we don't want them crossing a major road or there's a fence, or there's, you know, some sort of other physical barrier. Um, because we're, I'm gonna go through these really quickly. Um, she looked at the half mile walk. So those are the blue, the blue lines. Um, she asked Lewis to place them those circles on the future land use categories, just so that we can see is there a concentration of parks in areas where their population is not there. So you'll see areas of yellow that's residential, where there are less or fewer circles. Um, this only reflects city parks. It doesn't reflect community, um, parks and subdivision parks that are private amenity centers and things like that. So a whole bunch of numbers. Um, we mentioned earlier the change in the level of service standard. The comp plan just had four per four acres per 1000. What parks and recs, um, is wanting to do now is use the national parks, um, national Recreation and Parks, uh, administration guideline. And they base their guideline on the population bracket that we are in currently. So it goes from 20,000 to 49,999. We are in that smaller bracket currently at our 2022 population. But if we plan on growing at 74,005, then we go into the next bracket, which is the 50,000 to just thousand population. So the NRPA base, their, so the NR NRPA creates metrics, um, that are benchmarks that can be like comparing apples to apples of US and other communities based on population size. And so for our population size of 74,020 45, we are trying to achieve the same benchmark, provide the same level of park service using that same benchmark as another community of a population of 50 to just under 80 would be providing for their residents. So what that means is, based on those two bullets in 2020, we have a population of 47,002 20 parks. That's basically one park for every 2300 people. When we grow to 74,005. Um, and we don't create any new parks and we're at 21 parks, um, we are serving 3,500 people per park. The benchmark that we are trying to get to is one park for every 2,240 people so that we will be more in line with a population that's serving up to 80,000 people. Question? Yes sir. Communities have, uh, you know, uh, different amenities within that. Like where I live, they have pools and everything like mm-Hmm. Playgrounds and mm-Hmm. Is that coming to this? Yes. So in, how Does that affect this? 'cause it's basically a park, it's not a public park, but it's for that area, it's a park, Right? So right now, the comp plan, we can only really control what the city is able to provide and our capital dollars go towards city projects. But in ginger's written data analysis, you'll see in this slide, um, park type number six mm-Hmm. Um, those are special facilities where there's a facility that has, or a park site that has basketball, volleyball, whatever. So those different courts, so instead of having an inventory or standards based on each court type, we would, she's just classing them all as special facilities. Um, so the standard that Ginger and park staff are looking at is providing parks per person as well as acreage per thousand persons. But the goal of all of this data is to make sure that based on those two metrics parks per person and open space per 1000 capita is how well are they evenly distributed. We don't want to just meet 11 acres per per per thousand. We want to make sure that everybody has, you know, um, a relatively easy access to our park system. So that's going to feed into how we plan out where we fund our park systems and where those dollars are going to go to. So this is a lot of data, but the main thing, the main takeaway from this slide is for a population, a city with a population of 50,000 to 79,999. The NRPA benchmark is 11, um, 11 acres per 1000. Um, we, she might set the level service standard at eight with a goal of getting to 11 by 2045, but out the door we're shooting for eight. Um, really quickly. She also looked at the, um, the different facilities. And again, this is where Mark and his team, they went out and did all of this inventory. Um, she's also looking at trails and creating trails connections. We're not setting a level of service standard for trails because they don't just stop in our geographic boundaries. We are sharing it with other cities, the county and whatnot. Um, this is the trail system. Again, these are all data in the comp plan and policies that support and promote trails, but not setting an actual standard for trails. The other things that she's looking at is, um, the wellness aspect, the diversity aspect, and the inclusivity aspect. And again, when we come back the next time when it's a public hearing and we're going over the goals, objectives, the policies, these maps will be included in a 11 by 17 foldout. So you'll be able to see the trails maps and all of this stuff. Yeah, we might even do the big thingy so citizens can look at it, the big panels. Okay. That was all of chapter two mm-Hmm. That's the data analysis for chapter two, chapter three. Um, it's, it's, there's only like four slides. Um, quick question. Yes, sir. So Will we have, um, the underlying data of the, of this analysis or just the, the summary? No, it'll be a document. It'll, it'll be the d when you, when this goes to actual hearing, it'll be the data analysis document and the goals and objectives document. One is for supporting the other and the goals, objectives and policies, the gaps. The GLP is what this body would make a decision on. So that goals, objectives, and policies document is what actually gets transmitted plus the data, but to the state. Um, but because we're only adopting the policies and not the data, if there are changes that we need to make or updates that we need to make to the data, we don't have to transmit those to the state. Thank you. Mm-Hmm. Um, so the next few slides are from Jen Bowling and Utilities. Um, the utilities department is using the central Florida water initiative, which is currently underway for their water projection. Water, of course, ties to sewer and reclaim water. Um, without looking at all the numbers, this is what the utilities department is projecting. And again, the, this population number is smaller than the future land use element population number because not all of our residents and our projected population are going to be on sewer, uh, I'm, I'm sorry, on portable water or sewer. So there are still pockets of the city that will have to stay on well and septic. So that this is strictly service for water, um, growing the population out. I'm sorry. Yes. And this is only based on those boundaries that you mentioned, Mike? Yes. City, city pipelines not, Yeah. Anything with that agreement we have, Not only, not only within those boundaries, but also areas that we just don't think we'll ever get. Okay. It might be areas over near Apopka, divinee land and Ad Mims that we're just not gonna have sewer, uh, in some places. Maybe not an modern sewer, but yes. But that's it. So, um, when comp plan amendments come through, the initial test is capacity based on the information that I receive from the utilities department. In terms of our facilities for capacity, we are fine. The big challenge going from comp plan amendment to rezoning to development plans is the connections getting those lines from the main line to the service line, to the actual individual lines. So the engineering is usually what comes up as the challenge. But in terms of the water treatment facilities capacity to provide water service, we are okay. Um, so I just got this information from Jen, um, at five this afternoon. So it's dated three 12. So that's today. Um, utilities is projecting a demand for 13,192 water pop water customers between 2025 and 2045. Um, in terms of sewer, um, briefly, she's looking at an 88% of the water demand. So, um, I'm sorry, I'm going through real quickly, but the main number that you're, that, that I wanted to share tonight is that they're anticipating a demand for 11,644 new sewer customers between 2025 and 2045. So that was water and sewer, uh, utilities sub element. Um, still in chapter three, now we are in the drainage element, um, because storm water is still one of the list of facilities that we need to provide, uh, in, in the statues that, that we need to consider. So Marrie, um, not Marrie, Milan Wilmack, our city engineer, um, worked with his new engineer, um, as well as Steve, um, public works director. And what they did was they looked at comp, um, drainage elements of other cities like Almont, Lakeland, Maitland, winter Garden, and compared it to our current drainage sub element and felt that our current drainage sub element is lacking in a lot of ways. So this slide right now shows the existing language in the drainage element. It has a purpose, it has an environmental setting. It's 33 pages of very descriptive data or a, a long narrative on every single water body that we have. Um, the, it sets a regulatory framework, but it in terms and concepts, but it doesn't have a level of service standard. Um, and then a needs assessment based on each lake. And what they've done is they're wanting to keep the purpose, of course, but shorten the environmental setting narrative, um, looking at the natural features, not just the, um, the lakes and the the basins. Um, and then looking at creating a standard for how we're going to manage drainage. So they're looking at drainage facilities, um, the management of those facilities and actually having standards for drainage, um, level service standard for drainage as new projects come in. So with that said, they went through and did an inventory of all the existing basins in the city. Um, that's what this map represents. And, and this blowout is just a bigger version of what's on the map, is my attempt to make it, make the legend more legible. Um, so they looked at the basin, um, basins in the city. They also looked at the different soils in the city. One thing that we are also making sure that we're doing in this plant update is where connect to where there's, um, where it makes sense to connect, like drainage and soils, for example, also has an impact on the, the direction of conservation and vice versa. Same thing with parks and recreation. So a park could be a stormwater facility that we, um, retrofit in, but it also serves as a park. So those considerations where some cross pollination makes sense between drainage conservation and parks. This comp plan will have policies to address that. Um, they also looked at the floodplain base maps, um, and also the elevations. So these two maps are really important because we have right now a policy that says that we have to stay 25 feet away from floodplains. Um, we are also looking at, and I don't know if you guys are aware, we just, uh, were approved for the CRS community rating survey for those property owners who are part of the National flood insurance program. So we are now approved at a class nine, which means that it'll, it'll go in effect October 1st of this year, which means that for those homeowners that have an NFIP insurance for flood, um, they get a 5% discount because we've adopted some things in our code that gets us to a Class nine rating. We are currently in the process of making another code update to try to get us to a Class eight or seven, which will give our homeowners even more discount for flood insurance. So that's why these two maps play a, a pretty significant role. 'cause we wanna look at where the floodplains are. We wanna look at the elevations of not just the ground, the roads, but also the structures. So in the ordinance that we're working on right now, a building and a structure in that ordinance is specifically related to how those terms are defined in the Florida building Code, not in our LDC. So that drainage really quickly. Um, mobility is transportation again, by itself. There's a bunch of slides here, so I'm just gonna go glean over the major focus areas really quickly. So, um, Kimberly Horn is our consultant. They are working with Mike and I on the mobility element. Um, we looked at the existing road network. Currently there are standards are based on the six levels of service. A through F. F means nobody's moving. The system is failing. Um, a means roads are not at F start. Yep. Our roads are not at f In some jurisdictions they want F because then it pushes people to use alternative modes. But we also don't want a either, because what a means is that the city has allocated dollars to resources to build a road that no one's using. 'cause there's, there's no congestion. So we wanna have a happy medium, and then the next few slides will go into that. Um, so DOT is moving from the standard LOSF, you know, A, B, C, D, e, F two more of context classification. So standards will still be whether they're operating fine or not operating fine, but is not just looking at the, um, I don't know Ms. Williams if you've seen the generalized tables. So DOT's handbook on the generalized tables is basically looking at the road, how many lanes and how, um, what the context is. So if it's a two lane undivided in a rule setting, they give a, it's designed for the next, this number of trips, and this is, you know, the design speed, the level of service is based on the road type and the design speed. So what this is doing is looking at, um, the more on the classification of what's around it. So whether it's suburban, residential, suburban commercial, or just urban general. Um, these classifications here come from the DOT. Um, and so this is the standards in terms of the number of trips. And this is one lane directional only. Um, we are shooting for a level service E for all of our roads, um, in this comp plant update. So as you can see in this map, we have a bunch of C3 Cs, or suburban suburban commercial and suburban residential with one little location. Maybe some more will pop up as we go on with this update. For an urban general context, they looked at existing levels of service. Um, there's only one failing system that's in our jurisdictional limits, which is McGuire. Those other two red lines are outside of our jurisdiction. Um, I've asked them to remove that. So this is an older map, but those two red lines will, those two other red lines will go away. Um, what we also asked them to do is, Mike and I sat down with Amanda and James, our consultants, and said, by 2034, these are all the improvements that we plan on finishing. Whether they are alignments or widening or adding facility, whether there's a turn lane, um, improving a signal intersection or something like that. Those improvements are there. And what this road shows is with all those improvements, there are still some failing systems. Um, some, again, outside of our jurisdiction, she's gotta update those, but still just essentially, uh, three in our geographic boundary, that might be at an F. Um, again, f doesn't mean that nobody's moving. It is just based on the adopted standard. They can't get that volume of cars through that signal at a certain time. So again, um, this was because like I said, the statute now requires a 10 year look. So 2034, and now we are going into 2045, which is our long range. Um, horizon. Those are all the improvements that we gave them. Um, some of these improvements include the ones that are built into the plans that have been recently approved. For example, progress 4, 2, 9, that East West Road on the south side of their property, the 4 2 9 business center that also is introducing another East west road to create those connections. And then ultimately Pine Street when that comes in. So with all these improvements you're looking at, um, stills and failures, but again, the bulk of them are not ours. State Road 50 is not ours. A lot of that traffic is just growth around us by 2045. Same thing with Clark Co Road. Um, an old winter garden that is outside of the city limits. So we're still essentially failing. Um, this is Silver Star, but hopefully with the DOT project, if we ever rise up in the priorities list and they make that improvement, then hopefully that red line will also go away. Clark, um, might still be rough. Um, okay, where else real quick? Yes, Go back to the improvements. So I'll point out Some of the improvements you'll see if we start from, uh, south to north, that's four Lane, Tom and Boulevard. You'll see the extension of can use your mouse. Will it show? Yeah, the ex. So four lane of Tom and Boulevard, the extension of Old Winter Garden Road. Then you have the, uh, the four Laneing of Silver Star, which is a state road project. Uh, you'll see Lakewood, we make it into a three lane, uh, more of a collector road, which, which allows more free flow, more trips. So we pump trips on Lakewood, kind of a north, another north south, that's three Lane Fullers crossroad. We have the extension of, uh, crown Point crossroad up in the northwest, uh, from the high school. The backside being complete, uh, to the left there. Yes. So, so traffic going to the high school doesn't have to use a COA pop at all. That's showing a four Laneing of Ako Apopka, uh, and the four lane of Clark, which is just about, which is underway. So those are some of the improvements we have. And it shows you that we, we are hoping that, um, we can utilize more, uh, development, which would have more walkability. Uh, for instance, things will start to change. Up in the Northwest there's gonna be three, uh, there's gonna be two new gas stations. There's gonna be new restaurants, retail. Uh, so some of those services, people won't have to drive around the city to get all the way to the car wash or, or to, uh, gas. Uh, they can stay up up in their area, but Good question. Yes. Um, number six, Windermere Road at Roberson four Lane. And are you coordinating that with Windermere? So they four lane the rest of it down? No, no, we're not four Lane McGuire. McGuire still stays with this. McGuire is Here four Lane Windermere Road. We're four Lane Tom to Roberson. Right. It's written there as Windermere, but that segment is Toman Tom. It's Toman. Yeah. Yeah. No, we're not working with the county. I mean, they'll get a copy of this. So they'll see, they have their own plans. I mean, You're at the traffic circle, right? Yep, yep. Right there. Right to the traffic circle. Yep. But below that is still two lanes, right? Yes. Yep. That's not ours. Yes, I know it's not ours. Yes. But they'll see us, they'll see in our, they'll get a copy of this when we transmit it. We transmit it to the state, but we also transmit it to Windermere Orange County, uh, Apopka Winter Garden. And they will see that we're planning, it's already planned in the comp plan for a future four lane at, to, it's nothing new to them, but they'll see that that's remaining and they could plan as such. And part of That Orange County, part of it's Windermere. Yeah. Okay. I bet you they don't have the right of way to four lane it, and then to take, try to take some homes out of Yeah, Windermere, that's gonna be a big, You know, that's interesting. I was looking at the Lakewood going to full crossroad. Where, where is, do we have that much space there for a three lane Lakewood After you pass West Road going? No, we'll need, we'll start, we'll start, but by making it a collector, that will be an area. We have some vacant lands. It'll also be an area of redevelopment. We're hoping in the future, it'll start, it'll do an indication to people in your field to say, wait, Lakewood's just not a local road. It's a collector. What does that mean? And then other things will happen and you'll say, okay, well we can, this is an area of future growth. Lakewood. Yeah. That probably should start being, I mean, it's, it's primarily residential right now, but some of the areas can be non-residential, mixed use, those type of things. So yeah, we have it on the north side at Clair Kona, we have mixed use on The north side. Yes. Okay. Yep. Then you have around the, if you think about, you know, where we, where we have the Montessori school, you go from Fuller South down to worse. There's opportunities to have, there's large acreages, some large for a COI acreage is there, that could be something else. Mm-Hmm. Okay. So one of the things that we are considering is that when we put these, um, plan improvements, uh, into the comp plan, is that it will inform the general public, of course, in our, uh, in our, when our elected officials, um, approve them. But as an example, if you're familiar with I Drive and international, um, drive that area, the county's comp plan states that if you develop in this area, you come in for anything, you're going to set aside a transit lane. So it's written in the policy. So regardless of who is in house, who's staffing, when you, when any project comes in into this geographic area, you'll be asked to set aside a transit lane. Not that we're adding transit here, but if we're planning on making these road improvements, then we are giving our staff the city a document to point to, to say, as projects come in, we are are planning for this road improvement so that we can improve circulation in our city. So when projects come in, we have to co-plan the 0.2 to say, we need to plan for this. You want your approved improvements or your project, then we need additional right of way. And over time we'll collect and gather that right of way. So a goal would be in the transportation for, for, for, uh, implementing this an objective and a policy. A policy may be that all future collector roads are gonna be 90 feet wide. So when, so then we facilitate that on a, in the land development code to say this type of road, you need 90 feet, um, width in front of you. So when a project comes in and there's only 65 feet, we get half from that property owner. And as they develop, that tells them that's the rational nexus to, to get that property. Okay. So when they come in for development, like we do now on a opco, all those, all those industrial flex commercial all gave 35 foot. So one gave 35 some gave 32 feet because we set it in that character plan. But that's the rational nexus to get that. Now we get enough of those and we come through with a public project, we wanna finish it, then we've gotta do the imminent domain on the rest of them. But as project comes in, it tells them, oh, I'm on a collector. It needs to be 90 foot, it's not, they're probably gonna want right away. I need to plan on that in my site plan that I'm gonna lose 15 foot off the front or 10 Mm-Hmm. In some cases they have to give it to us. Some cases we pay, we purchase it. So we get an appraisal of that strip of land, uh, for instance, uh, next to the, uh, on the corner of co of Marshall Farms and 50 that call indoor self storage facility. Uh, we pay them like 37,000 for right of away. It just depends on how they're coming in, how much we need, what the scenario is. So Yeah, another example is that roundabout. That's, that's coming on Blackwood. Um, the dentist's office, the roundabout impacts a small acreage, a small percentage, uh, square footage of their site. So we did a, an appraisal on it. That value goes to, to them in terms of impact piece. Um, we also looked at transit. Um, of course we don't control transit, that's links. So it's kind of unrealistic to set a level of service on a facility and, uh, a service that we don't control. Um, so I, I don't think that this comp plan will set a standard, but will set a goal of achieving some sort of, um, providing for planning for transit, like stops and shade and shelters and things like that. Um, should the routes become available, um, something that we are, um, going towards is more focused on not just cars, but bicycle facilities and walking facilities. So DLT is, is rolling out, and honestly, I don't know how long they've been putting this, pushing this forward in other cities. Um, but it, it makes sense. It's looking at the level of stress instead of level of service standard for bikes. We're looking at the level of stress on our bicyclists. So it ranges from level stress of one through four. And, um, the first table up here is whether or not a bike facility is present. And the table at the bottom is whether or not a bike facility is not present, such as a bike lane or the presence of a sidewalk. Um, other separators from that separates the bike's, bicyclist from the vehicle. Mm-Hmm. Um, and those levels of stress are sort of graphically depicted here. So, uh, one is basically the facility is safe enough to where even a child can ride on it and feel comfortable riding on it. And four is for our, our, you know, diehard cyclists who know what they're doing. They understand bike laws and, and things like that. So we are hoping to shoot for, based on, you know, the analysis, the recommendation may be to achieve somewhere between a two and a three for our bike facilities, um, regardless of whether or not the presence of those facilities, the bike lanes are there. Um, same thing for the pedestrian level of stress, traffic stress. Um, one means that someone who is pushing someone else in a wheelchair is comfortable walking that path to someone who has to walk because they don't have any other means. And, you know, they are physically and mentally capable of making that, that, um, that trip. So again, shooting for a level two, level three, a lot of our roadways are posted at, at 25 miles per hour anyway, so it makes sense to still shoot for a two. Um, it really depends on the extent of separation and whatnot. So this also kind of feeds into looking at whether or not we need to start, um, considering wider rights of ways so that we could have the six foot sidewalk plus more adequate space for that landscape strip, uh, and things like that. So these are all the discussions. Um, we have a biweekly meeting. We meet with the team every two weeks, every Thursday, um, from two to two to three. I just said it for just one hour. If you can make it great. If you can't make it, that's fine, just let us know. It's all on the S drive. Everybody can access what everybody else is doing. Um, if someone can't make it, somebody else can come. So the conversation is happening. So, uh, it's, it's a ever, ever evolving, um, process. Um, so she also looked at the stress levels, um, and the bike routes. So again, shooting for a level of stress of two, uh, to three. These are all the facilities. Um, the thinner lines are existing. Um, the bold green line is proposed. I'm wondering if, yeah, that's also existing trails, which are sort of up here. Um, where is it? Huh? It's hard to distinguish. I might need to look at the paper copy, but, you know, they, um, west Orange Trail is up here, so we're trying to continuously make those connections from the West Orange Trail south to hopefully here to Blueford. So that was mobility. Um, the question about The yes mo uh, mobility in section four, we talk about, uh, bicycles and, uh, and, and foot traffic. But what about, uh, other kinds of modes of mobility like golf cart and things like that? How come we're not taking into golf cart traffic in any of our Golf cart is considered a vehicle. Yeah, it would be under, so Where a bike can go, it, It, so if you go back, so go back to, yeah, that posted speed so that the two or three, um, that's getting roads at 20 to 35 miles an hour. So it might not be, um, you know, you, you, you've got the goal to achieve that in places, but you also have the engineering that comes into play. For instance, a collector road with a design speed of 35 has to be posted between 35 and 50 potentially. That, that's something you're looking at that we have to, we have to evaluate. Okay. But yes, a golf cart is considered a vehicle. It can, in some circumstances be driven on a sidewalk, uh, statutorily. And those statutes always change. And, and so, but it's pedestrian bicycle, bus is your general Yeah. And cars For mobility and, and obviously cars, But you can see, if you go back to that trails map, you'll see the orange. So, or the green. So you have the West Orange Trail, a coa, Apopka, we're gonna widen it four lane, and we're putting a 12 foot trail down the side. So these are the things that can help get the comfort. Blueford avenue, lot of comfort. You have little kids with bicycles, mom with strollers, that what helped that is the eight foot sidewalk. So where we can get eight foot sidewalks, we can potentially get cars off the road. We can get the parents with their kids going to wherever and not having to drive necessarily for that trip, and that will help. Okay. Five. Um, the title of this one is Environmental Friendly, resilient, and Sustainable. So sustainable in this context doesn't necessarily mean environmental. It's, it's the development. Sustainable is the pattern and style and how we're growing are our sites in terms of how we design them, are they sustainable for, um, giving the development what it needs and wants per code, but also trying to make a concerted effort to protect our natural resources. So, um, Seth Birch with Public Works, he's the floodplain management, um, manager. Um, he's done a huge dive and looked and looking at our wetlands. What this map shows is a very recently prepared map. It considers the city's geographic boundary, which is also called Terminus with our JPA. Um, the green that you see is the city's designated wetlands as they are now. Um, the dark green is the Orange County designated wetlands inside of our jurisdiction that we haven't claimed yet in our wetlands data. Our, our wetlands numbers, um, that dark green, um, number, those are all parcel data. Um, and it's based on the inventory that Orange County just did leading up to the adoption of their updated wetlands ordinance. Um, this map also shows in pink the hydro soils, which are indicative as one of the key indicators of wetlands, as well as soils that are showings. Um, you know, hydro type qualities that when projects come in, we look at the map. Yeah, there could be some hydro soils there. Let's give it a a, a deeper look as opposed to just accepting that there's no hydro soils. We wanna be more con, more conscientious of looking at those, um, potential for hydro soils as we move forward with our projects. And then a blue, of course, is the water bodies. We are also looking at the city's available rivering systems. They're actually more than I thought that we have, which is, which is pretty cool. So this is, it's, this first map is a portion of the city in the northwest area. So you've got Apopka, uh, lake Apopka, and, um, I'm sorry, Fullers is here. Crown. And then that is Apopka Road. And then this other map is more the south central part portion of the city. And so we have, um, rivering systems here. Um, there's data behind each of these points. And then this is like leading into the Lake Lata. Lake Lata is over here. So there's an ES string river system here. So if you look at the Riverine system, the map on the left up there at the top, the one going up to Lake Apopka, that is all set aside as conservation. That one is, is totally protected. Uh, the one with the, um, the ditch going down is that's, that's, that's the northeast ditch. Those are already kind of protected. They'll have existing drainage easements adjacent to them. And then the floodway that you see on the one on the right, if you go over by Lake Lata, uh, all, all of that is deeded to the city. So that's, that's all protected. But the rest of it goes around into the future phases of city center. And we'll all be turned over in a conservation easement when they come in for development. So, we'll, we will have protected most of the river riverine systems in the city in conservation. Mm-Hmm. Thank you Mike. Um, so, um, public works is also looking at the floodplains inventory. Um, the map and graphic on the left is the areas of special flood hazards. Um, in the city we have 909 acres according to parcel data, NGIS data of flood hazard areas. And out of that 900 we have set aside almost 380 acres. Um, and as constipation or open space. So almost half the map on the left hand, uh, the right hand side is, um, the flood vulnerability map. So this map, again, is married to the drainage map and also the floodplain ordinance that we are currently working on. And it just shows, um, the a hundred year in these pinkish area based on the base flood elevation and then areas of 500 year. Um, and then the floodways, again, inventory of the basins and the sub-basins and the lakes. And he put together this table of each of their acreages, their names, the surface water elevations, floodplain, um, the foot above base that it's, that each lake has and the type of lake. So it's, it's a very telling table. Um, lake's inventory, uh, continued. Also looking at lake water quality aquifer recharge. That is something that's in our current comp plan. And we are continuing to look at that further, looking at the priority areas. Um, again, bringing back up soils because how soils are impacted affects our aquifer. So we do want to, um, identify those soil types so that as projects come in, we can look towards protecting the ones that are more environmentally sensitive that we need to protect. Um, the last chapter is governance. I don't have any slides on that because it's basically, there's no data really to, um, in terms of intergovernment intergovernmental coordination. It's just continuing those policies that we coordinate with our sister agencies, our sister cities and things like that. So that's all that we have. Not responsible. You're not responsible for anything. What was that? Are trying, have to go On the record, please. So again, um, when we meet for our first public hearing, hopefully we can do it, we'll see if we can do it all in one public hearing. It might be, it might have to be its own. I I, as you can see, can you imagine going over policies for these? So we'll have to break it up, do a workshop, get you, we'll, we'll, as we're they're coming through, we'll kind of gauge that and maybe tag on, um, uh, an element on another meeting and then, and then try to wrap it all up in a, in an additional one, maybe even on a week that has five weeks in it, or five Tuesdays or Wednesdays, maybe on that fifth one, come back and have a whole meeting to get that to the point. So, and When do you plan on Doing this? And We'll, and so what we'll do is we're gonna really, it's a big pack. Well, we're, we're, we're hoping to August-ish. We're hoping to in August get that. And so that, you know, we run against summer vacations, but we've got staff. Uh, so for instance, we only have, we have our transportation consultant working as a consultant. Everyone else is in-house. And, uh, so, uh, the, the, the go, the GOPs are not gonna be big. There shouldn't be more than two, maybe in some cases a third goal. But you can encapsulate 'em all in a, in a couple of goals and objectives and, and policies. Uh, so, and we'll get, we'll have to give you time. We're not gonna be able to get you the packet on Thursday and expect for you to, or Friday and expect to be able to meet at a Tuesday and understand it. So that's what we're having to get to. Yeah. But having this really helps. 'cause we can, you'll have it in your packet. We can touch on it again, if you have any final questions. Um, and then go right into the new maps. 'cause in the, in, what we'll have is, uh, these are transportation. We have new maps, but you'll be seeing these maps and we'll have some new ones Mm-Hmm. That are part of the, that are in the data analysis, but then we'll have the new maps of what we're agreeing to for the future in the Map series. In the map series. Yeah. So the, we will, we will have where we, what we're at now, what we've been, and then the new ones will be future, future lanes, future facilities and such. So, and then we'll be bringing land development code stuff too. But one thing we have to do is the land development code has to run, and then we kinda have to slow it down because anything new outta here, if there's specific out of our comp plan, anything that's very specific, for instance, uh, if just an easy one. I, I don't really think we're changing, but when you have in the comp plan, it says you must appropriately buffer non-residential uses from residential. And the, the policy may be for when you have residential adjacent to commercial, you're gonna put a 35 foot buffer with a, with a, uh, hardscape and landscape and land of development code that has a 25 foot buffer right now with landscaping and a fencer wall may need to be updated. But we've gotta, we've gotta update the land of development code based off of any changes here. Yeah. From this comp plan. So we can do a lot of the land of development code update to implement the downtown, make more urban setting scrivener errors, some changes, you know, really clean up the, the p and z election and, and that process, those, those kind of things were ongoing. And then we'll kind of slow down, wait for this to get adopted, see if we need to add anything else in, and then bring the land of development code and do all this over again with a different, with vari. These, those are hard action items. Okay. Yeah. The, the other thing too is like, the opposite example of what Mike is saying is that it may be that the plan for a certain geographic area, like the downtown, for example, where the comp plan now and the code now creates chopped up s separated developments. We to promote walkability, um, and foot traffic and our residents patronizing the different sites. You don't wanna create buffers where it is inconvenient for them to get to it. You don't want them to have to jump back into their car to go because there are too many physical barriers in the way. So it may be that we need to look at, um, policies that encourage complimentary uses and the types of complimentary uses and minimums of certain square footages so that you've got the retail and the commercial and the residential all working together. But that may just be a portion of the city where the commission might wanna see that growth happen. So I'll tell you one thing we're looking at is we're looking at increasing our maximum densities in those in land uses. So right now we're maximum, maximum of 16 dwelling units an acre for high density, a couple of character areas. If you do very good architecture, you can get a little density bonus. We are looking at raising the minimum from six, from the maximum from 16 to Possibly, well, That more in line with what the county has. So 20, 22, 24 dwelling units an acre. Yeah. So we've shown you, um, like the northern tip of the iceberg. Um, so far staff is, uh, Craig has seen all of this. We are moving ahead with, um, goals and objectives. Um, at our last meeting last, uh, two weeks ago, we looked at goals and objectives for each of the elements. Um, now we're going to flesh out those objectives with policies. So, um, it, it's, it's, this is like an opportunity to write our vision for the next 20 plus years, right? And right now the comp plan doesn't have a policy. We actually did a staff charette in terms of, um, a couple of us wrote a vision, not a vision for the city, um, a vision for the comp plan. And then we all just sort of sat round table and worked on the language, massaging it from the perspective of, of utilities and public works and parks and, and whatnot. So the comp plan will have a vision. It'll be something that you guys can keep at the diets and refer to it. So it's not one of those books that is 300 pages long that sits on the, um, the shelf. Yeah. So That's great stuff. That's good. Um, yep. And Yes. And so this is, you represent the citizenry just as much as the city commission does. Um, so when, when we get this information to you, you know, some questions may be just that's, you know, you know, why is this road three lane and four not four lane? Or why have you thought about a path here? What are we doing about this? What about a lake? You know, what about the park? What if we add, you know, bring the questions, bring the suggestions when you see it, but, uh, Cool. Yeah, think, I think it's interesting if I, I was on the ear committee back in 97, 98, something like that. Wow. And, um, as I remember then we were talking that our population would, would probably max out somewhere around 70,000. So it's interesting to see that we're talking about 5,000 more only. So, um, yeah. Yeah. All the indicators kind of point to that 70,000 mark. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. And things changed, like there, there was a, there was a period of time in 2011 that where they required a green, you had to add a new whole green element. Yeah. 2009 I think. And then, and then two years later they took it away and all these jurisdiction adopted all this model language and, you know, everything's gonna be energy star and you're, everyone's gonna have roof, solar panels and then it, your requirement went away and No. And people got rid of that element. So things will come up, we'll have to look at and evaluate. So that's what we've got. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. If, uh, so we're gonna move to old business. We have nothing there. We have nothing in new business. Uh, miscellaneous project status report. You wanna, We are, you know, Lakewood Avenue is open. We are finalizing, getting close to being able to close, uh, finest finish that project where they can all get cos on the apartments and on the town homes. Uh, we've got, um, meet met with them, the, the commercial developer out of the three, three entities building it out on a grocery store. They'll be submitting that soon. And that'll come to you guys as a large scale site plan. Uh, we anticipate, uh, we have a biweekly meeting on the regional sports facility with the consultants putting together that, that's gonna be a big project that we're gonna have to be a part of while we're doing these other two big things and, and that we're anticipating a submittal early May. What, Real quick, if you don't mind, what is there, you know, I, I know we've talked about part of that, that whole deal is widening of Apopka Road, but what is the, do they have to do that before they can start construction? What is, what does that look like? Uh, to answer that question is to change the land use to allow the development, which we will tie the land use change to a specific development site data, you know, a maximum amount of non of commercial retail hotels. Um, a maximum amount of acreage for the the play use. Uh, we will look at, uh, so I guess probably the, the safe answer and the proper, or not proper, but the, what you would say is they need to have all of the mitigation to, to make the level of service work. But what is that too? Are they developing in phases? We have to look at are they developing in phases? What phases coming first? You know, if you look at the ball fields, if they build all the ball fields, they could hold all the tournaments and have all the trips, but so the roads have to be done. So we're just gonna have to look at it and, and figure out the best way as we, as we do as a city, uh, to help people get in and through a process and break ground, um, as expeditiously as we can. That makes sense in covering all of our bases. So, but we are, um, relying on, uh, orange County for any roadway improvements, pops, possibly Winter Garden. So they have their own right of way use in their process. So we've gotta have to balance what we can get going and, and as those mitigating circumstances come online. Yeah. So for instance, Ako Pop Road from the bend at the Masti going north, even just around that bend, but probably down past McCraney, uh, to where the West Orange Girl Club from there north, there's sufficient right of way to do the widening. Mm-Hmm. So that could that be done first and then the, the south side, it's how we just gotta look at that, those impacts and see. Yeah, that was my next question is, you know, with, with all this talk about they're gonna widen the road and all that Orange County owns that road, right? We don't own that road. Yeah. We have preliminarily looked at, is there an opportunity for us to, uh, take over ownership and maintenance If that would be, uh, financially feasible and economically, um, viable option to overtake that road and with some seed money or something that we, we've, those will be some of the discussions what ifs, But even if we don't take the road over, has, has Orange County already made some, uh, agreements to say they could widen the road? No, we haven't. We've only talked to Orange County on a staff level, on a, on a bunch of issues. This was one of 'em. Okay. But we didn't, it was just kind of, Hey, this is coming down the road, so. Gotcha. Cool. Thank you. Before they submit, we, I'm hoping to get a technical memorandum on some things that we can begin having real conversations and hand them a technical memorandum. So it's more than just a if and, but, so, Great. Anything else? Anybody have any questions for staff? Okay. If, do you have anything you'd like to Oh, I, I got the answer. McKees Street is being closed for those three days during spring break on purpose because they have to remove the physical rails out of the crossing. Okay. And so they're taking the rails out, moving 'em to a different location in a coe, upgrading the old rails there with these, 'cause these were upgraded, uh, while ago, but they're removing the rail so they gotta close the physical crossing. And they planned it during spring break, which Is all, all like from from McKee, it's from Blueford. It's already done. It'll be done in front of McKee all the way down to, I think they're at a, uh, Washington Columbus. Forget what that road is. Yeah. So the physical rail's coming out, but it's still CSX property ownership. So, So the road will be closed for three days? Yes. While they do that. Okay. Do you want to bring anything up? I want to give you ample time to speak Vice, vice Chairman, are you good? I'm good. I'll take a motion to, your Honor. I appreciate your opportunity. Motion to adjourn second, anybody. Thank you. Have a great night. Mm-Hmm. Thank you very much guys. It was great. Thank you. I took a lot of notes down.