all right we'll go ahead and call the March 5th 2024 Winter Haven Planning Commission meeting to order Jordan if you would please take roll David Lane here Mario Manago Elizabeth Davis here Jennifer fking here Wendy vinters here Colin Wells here Ed Smith here Tina Summerland and Craig Fuller here we have a quorum all right if you would please stand for the invocation and pledge Heavenly Father we thank you for this day we thank you for the City of Winter Haven and all her residents we ask that you be with us and guide us we ask these things in your name amen amen I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the for IT stand One Nation God indivisible with liy and justice for all all right Commissioners had a chance to review the minutes of the previous meeting if if so we'll entertain a motion to approve so moved second all right second all those in favor say I I all oppose same sign all right minutes are approved okay I'll run into a brief explanation of how the hearing will run uh cases will be read into the record and City staff will provide a presentation Commissioners will be able to ask questions of Staff uh once they've had an opportunity to do that we will close the planning portion of the hearing and open the public portion of the hearing anyone wishing to speak for or against a case starting with the applicant may do so and we ask that you limit your comments to 5 minutes uh once everybody from the public has had an opportunity to speak we will close the public portion of the hearing and reopen the planning portion of the hearing uh Commissioners can ask additional questions or we'll entertain a motion and a vote um if anybody here thinks that you may speak for or against a case if you would please stand up and Jordan will swear you in do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this case shall be the truth all right moving right into new business case number p2401 DS request by SEO Clark for special use approval for a child care facility located in the mixed use MX zoning District General location 399 6 Street Southeast the area covered by this request is. 29 plus or minus Acres thank you heather reuter senior planner for the record um as you look here this is the zoning map the subject property is uh in the hatched uh designation there it is zoned um MX mixed use as are the adjacent uh properties to the east across 6th Street and as South as you go along for the frontage mly to the north there is some commercial neighborhood and there is single family residential to the West as you look at the aerial uh you can see it is a um a commercial property of previous single family home that's been converted and been used as an office uh for some years and the petitioner is proposing for a uh daycare uh also I'd like to point out on the map to the uh Northeast across the road there is another daycare that did receive special use approval um that is also located in the MX zoning District this is a view looking at the subject property another view looking back at the subject property and some of the ancillary parking area areas as you look to the north along 6th Street cane snowballs is immediately to the north as well as Dennison stadium and brigam um Academy as you look to the east there's single family residential to the South there's a mixture of a single family multif family and there's um as you go more South there would be commercial as well as the high school and as you look to the West this is the driveway on the rear of the property and there's a wall um that separates from the single family Sayo Clark is the petitioner and requests the Planning Commission Grant special approval to operate a child care facility in the mixed use zoning District the property subject to this request consists of. 29 plus or minus acres and contains a 1,712 ft commercial building with Associated parking which was constructed in 1940 the most recent use of the property was an office the petitioner wishes to lease the space for a child care facility with approximately three employees parking will be provided on site with access from 6th Street Southeast and Avenue D Southeast as this is considered a change in use a site plan review will be required to address adequate parking landscape buffers and other code requirements a childcare facility with three employees can be expected to generate approximately 16 peak hour trips onto the surrounding roadway network based on this low volume of trips the adjacent roadway can accommodate these trips at is as it is operating at less than Capac uh staff recommends that you approve this request subject to the following condition a site plan shall be submitted and approved and all required improvements shall be made prior to the occupancy and operation of the child care facility uh and this is the conceptual plan that was provided by the applicant I stand for any questions you may have will the area be um uh be um fenced off there that is not determined at this time um there's not a requirement for fencing off the entire property um as part of the buffer adjacent to the single family um there is uh a fence but there are is a wall there that would be required as part of the buffer um I'm sure then if there's any requirements of the state through DCF permitting for any of the locations the children would be they would address those but that's not something the city regulates okay thank you any additional questions all right we close the planning portion of the hearing and open the public portion of the hearing if anybody wishes to speak for or against this case uh starting with the applicant you can do so now no all right seeing none we will close the public portion of the hearing and reopen the planning portion of the hearing any additional questions or we'll entertain a motion I'll make a motion to approve case number p-23 01-s request by SE Clark for special use approval for a child care facility located in the mixed use mxing District General location 399 6 Street Southeast the area covered by this request is. 29 plus minus Acres I'll second that all right as presented in the fact sheet with conditions correct as pres presented in the fact sheets with the conditions okay subject to the conditions okay and we have a second all those in favor say I I all oppose same sign all right all right case is approved moving on case number p- 24-2 s request by Church of the Redeemer of Winter Haven Inc for special use approval to allow the construction of a new Fellowship Hall and expand the existing sanctuary building located in the single family residential large lot R1 zoning District General location 1410 dundy Road the area covered by this request is 4.47 plus or minus Acres good evening Commissioners uh Chris Young Senior planner for the record um it's been a while since I presented it before you so uh it's good to see you all again uh so here we can see uh the zoning map uh the parcel in question is outlined in Red dundy Road is to the north uh you can tell by the legend at the lower uh right hand corner that it is a single family uh large Lots or the R1 immediately to the east is still single family R1 r 1 immediately to the West the yellow and to the north is R2 and to the Shaded kind of um uh maroon to the Northeast is public institutional that is uh Lake Elbert Elementary here we can see uh the aerial imagery uh of the existing church that's been on place for many many decades um we see the school to the Northeast again and the single family residential nature around it here's looking at the uh property itself what you're looking at is the the existing Fellowship Hall The Sanctuary is to the West that is odd oh maybe it's just slow loading this the aerial correct no this this is uh should be looking uh to the east I do apologize okay well let's just keep going uh this is looking to the north this is a single family residence immediately across the street uh across thundy okay so none of the aial imagery made it into the slide I do apologize um what you're looking at is the concept conceptual plan that was provided uh in the gray uh the kind of gray area here and I'll kind of point it out if I can uh in front of you you can see it the it's the proposed uh expansion of the fellowship hall immediately to the east of the existing Fellowship Hall and the existing uh sanctuary building uh with the addition the Church of the Redeemer of Winter Haven Inc the petitioner requests the Planning Commission Grant special use approval for the expansion of an existing religious facility in the single family residential large lot R1 zoning District the subject property totally 4.47 Acres located at 1410 dundy Road uh the petitioner proposes to construct a new 7,342 ft Fellowship Hall and expand the existing Sanctuary by 220 seats for a new seating capacity of 600 the property currently houses a 4,620 ft sanctuary building and a 9,40 ft multi-purpose building with Associated parking areas currently it has a c capacity for 380 and with4 on-site parking spaces consisting of eight Ada paved spaces and unapproved grass parking areas the new seating capacity will require a total of 180 on-site parking spaces the church is proposing to provide 211 parking spaces eight paved and 203 unimproved grass parking area the building will be utilized by the parishioners and staff for the meeting during normal hours between 8:30 a.m. and 4: p.m. uh Monday through Thursday and 8:30 a.m. to noon uh Friday and Sunday the expansion is to is expected to generate 109 additional peak hour vehicle trips during operation uh staff recommends approval of this request subject to the following condition a site plan shall be submitted and approved and all required improvements shall be made prior to the occupancy okay and I stand for any questions you may have thank you Chris anybody have any questions no all right we will close the uh planning portion of the hearing and open the public portion anybody from the public wishing to speak for or against this case all right if you would please state your name and address for the record my name is Alan Taylor I live at 170 East Lake Elbert Drive and I'm around the corner I'm in the single family residences on Lake Elbert drive and this project I think is far too big for that for the space it's they're trying to put in it in it the parking on that particular area of the road running into Winter Haven has seen innumerable accidents and we have a pull off now for people to turn right and go on to Lake Elbert Drive I think they're trying to do far too much in that area it should be cut down maybe half size that's my honest opinion I thank you thank you for your comments anyone else no all right we will close the public portion of the hearing and reopen the planning portion of the hearing any additional questions from Commissioners what's happened all right I will make a motion to approve case number p242 DS request by Church of the Redeemer of Winter Haven Inc for special use approval to allow the construction of a new Fellowship Hall and expand the existing sanctuary building located in the single family residential large lot R1 zoning District General location 1410 dunde Road the area covered by this request is 4.47 plus or minus Acres with the conditions suggested by staff and as presented in the fact sheet second all right we have a second all those in favor say I I I all oppose same sign okay moving on case number p- 24-16 administrative request to rezone 115 Parcels from single family residential small lot R2 zoning District to single family residential large lot R1 zoning District General location The woodpoint Phase 1 and Phase 2 subdivisions generally located east of Lake Daisy Road and Northeast of Lake Daisy the area covered by this request is 41.9 plus or minus Acres good evening uh Chris Young For the record uh so here we can see the the parel uh or the woodpoint phase one and phase two subdivisions outlined in red uh just Northeast of Lake Daisy uh excuse me this was the the future land use map uh uh showing the residential Suburban nature uh here we can see the existing zoning map this portion that's uh kind of uh lighter in color uh immediately north of the section that's uh outlined in red that is already zoned R1 uh so the only thing that we will be affecting is the current the darker zoning which is the R2 zoning so here's the aerial map of the existing uh subdivisions that is really weird Okay so staff requests the city rezone 115 Parcels from single family residential small lot R2 zoning District to single family residential large lot zoning District uh the subject partials are contained on approximately 41.9 plus minus acres and consists of the Point Phase 1 and Phase 2 subdivisions generally located east of Lake Daisy Northeast of sorry east of Lake Daisy Road Northeast of Lake Daisy uh the woodpoint phase one uh was approved and developed under poke County's Land Development requirements in 1999 and the woodpoint phase 2 was approved and developed under the city's Land Development requirements in 2004 uh currently there are six vacant Lots remaining in these two subdivisions woodpoint Phase 1 and phase two lots range in area between 9,000 12,000 sare ft which exceed the minimum dimensional requirements of the R2 zoning district and the requested R1 zoning districts uh homes within the subdivisions are larger than was typically found within the R2 zoning district and often exceed the minimum and maximum building setback requirements of that zoning District the subdivisions existing homes are more characteristic of the R1 zoning District a letter of support was in favor of the zoning change was received for the woodpoint homeowners association staff's recommendation is approval of this request and it's forwarding to the city commission uh for final action so is this just to accommodate the the leftover Lots like for building houses uh yes and to kind of make it more incline with the the R1 zoning District uh there are no changes that are proposed in terms of density uh there are no uh any there are there is nothing proposed that would really affect uh the development Within than the subdivision other than uh make it more inclined with the larger R1 zoning district and it doesn't in any way shape or form change existing residents you know actually I was going to add it will probably help the existing residents residences um right now R2 has maximum setback Provisions R1 does not and it's likely many of the houses in there today probably do not meet the maximum setback requirement they're probably set back too far so this would actually probably bring several of them into compliance with the code I have a question and maybe it well it it just pertains to the applicability and changing it because it seems It's they're 9 to 12,000 Square ft right and I thought R1 had to be minimum 10,000 squet 75 okay so that's it's listed because it could have changed but it's listed on all of the tables as 10,000 or I should say all the maps all of your Maps indicate minimum 10,000 yeah that's that's old nomenclature exactly I thought it used to G I don't know why that is doing that oh I see what you're saying I do apologize it's okay uh yes the R1 zoning District the minimum lot size is of square footage is 7500 sare F feet I I know there's been a continual everything smaller and this is now kind of the larger size of of those so it it makes sense I just thank you I just didn't want to make it something non I was like whoa we're we're doing this again you know where you change things and then it was still in place we would still be making a more conforming right by going to our oh yeah you'd have like two exclusions or something like that cuz there's not a lot of them so okay thanks okay all right any any additional questions all right we'll close the planning portion of the hearing and open the public portion anybody from the public wishing to speak for or against all right we will close the public portion and reopen the planning portion of the hearing I'll make a motion to approve case number p- 24-16 administrative request to rezone 115 Parcels from single family residential small lot R2 zoning District to single family residential large lot R1 zoning District General location the wood point Phase 1 and Phase 2 subdivisions generally located east of Lake Daisy Road and Northeast of Lake Daisy the area covered by this request is 41.9 plus or minus Acres as presented in the fact sheet second we have a second all those in favor say I I all oppose same sign all right case is approved moving on case number p2417 administrative request to rezone 41 parcels and a portion of another parcel from single family resident resal small lot R2 zoning District to single family residential large lot R1 zoning District General location the Cypresswood palmaia subdivision generally located west of palmia Road approximately 400t west of Sand Hill Lane the area covered by this request is 24.4 plus or minus Acres good evening uh Chris youngan for the record uh here's the future land use map so we can see uh the zoning on sorry the the use on the property uh de to the east is uh the Cypresswood uh golf subdivision uh to the West uh we have uh vacant pasture land but is also uh with the residential medium here we can see the current zoning on the property which is R2 uh we see a little bit of conservation uh to uh the north uh West uh and to the east we see the cypers wood uh golf subdivision which is currently uh located in the county the Poma subdivision is outlined in red here we can see the areial of the subdivision uh you can see that there are only a few Lots remaining in it uh to the to the West we have the large open pasture land to the east we have uh the uh the golf course subdivision and since there's a trifecta of imagery that's missing um just so everybody knows anybody from the public would like to see I do have handouts uh you can actually look at the imagery uh please come see me afterwards staff request the city rezone 41 Parcels on a portion of another parcel from single family residential small lot R2 zoning District to single family residential large Lots R1 uh the subjects are contained in 24.4 acres and are located in the cypers wood Paloma subdivision um five Lots remain uh undeveloped in the subdivision platted in 2003 the subdivision contains 41 Lots averaging 15,000 square ft in area the size of these Lots exceeds the minimal dimensional requirements found in the R2 zoning district and the requested R1 zoning District home District homes within the subdivision are larger than what is typically found within the R2 zoning district and often exceed the minimum maximum uh building setback requirements of that District the subdivisions existing homes are more characteristic of the R1 zoning District a letter of support in favor of the zoning change was re received from the Cypresswood palmaia homeowners association approval uh recommendation is approval for this request and it's forwarding to the city commission for final action I stand for any questions you may have any questions okay um we will close the planning portion of the hearing and open the public portion anybody from the public wishing to speak for or against if you would please stand in Jordan we'll swear you in and state your name and address for the record please do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this case shall be the truth I do uh it's not an opposition this this may be just clerical and it may not be important but it cites that there's actually 41 Lots there there are actually 39 residential lots the other two lots are r ition ponds so I don't know if that makes any difference but uh frankly we were all surprised that this was not our R1 a long time ago and can I have you state your name and address for the record my apology Robert DOD 4038 palomia Circle one right thank you sir I'll just clarify um since they private streets in here and the Retention Ponds privately owned property we have to assign zoning we have they're zoned as well right that's why there's Technic 41 Parcels in this request still Parcels yes that's correct okay understood okay anybody else from the public okay we will close the public portion of the hearing and reopen the planning portion of the hearing I'd like to make a motion in favor of case number p- 24-17 administr administrative request to rezone 41 parcels and a portion of another parcel from single family residential small lot R2 zoning District to single family resid IAL large lot R1 zoning District General location the Cypresswood palmaia subdivision generally located west of palia Road approximately 400 ft west of Sand Hill Lane area covered by the request is 24.4 more or less Acres as presented in the fact sheet and by staff second we have a second all those in favor please say I I all oppose same sign all right case is approved other business comments from staff okay I will uh go over a few things here um mostly what we did on uh our February meeting um the items are all moving forward to the city commission during the month of March and those included the update to our fence requirements um some changes to the MX zoning District to allow pharmacies a special use and then finally a uh small future land use and Zoning assignment for a parcel off old B till Lake Wills Road so those will all be moving forward this month and should all reach conclusion by the end of the month uh next thing I want to do is I want to welcome our new liaison commissioner doson who is down at the table and he is welcome here finally got here and I think I want to say he's come full circle so and then last I just want to remind you your next meeting is Tuesday April 2nd okay comments from uh planning Commissioners I have a question about um revising the um 10-year plan uh uh uh has any consideration been given to uh the area where the Winter Haven Regional Airport is because we're U looking at uh um significant growth at the airport and uh um I'm just wondering whether any of that surrounding area uh may have come under consideration well I'm going to be honest a lot of the land that surrounds the airport frankly is in another jurisdiction be it P County city of auburnville or city like Alfred um I do know that what is in the City of Winter Haven we do have policies in the comp comprehensive plan that address the airport and its surrounding airspace so we've done what we can do to protect the airport and its uh purpose but we're somewhat at the mercy of some of the other jurisdictions as well okay but but nothing has has come up yet from the other jurisdictions we um so far there has been one item that we were actively engaged with the City of Lake Alfred on on a development that we um had them include some conditions in a PUD that went forward um to my knowledge that project has never moved forward um land's still vacant but we required them to do an avigation easement that basically indicates that the residents are to acknowledge the presence of the airport and low flying aircraft so so thank you right any additional comments no comments from the public anybody all right seeing none we are journ