##VIDEO ID:9EZhb31ab3U## good afternoon welcome to the August 13th city of aapka Planning and Zoning Commission meeting if you would all please stand with me for a moment of Silent prayer and the pledge to the flag amen I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all tonight's meeting each item on the agenda will have a time for people from the public wishing to speak can speak on that matter on each individual matter we'll have a time for public speaking if there is anything that somebody would like to bring to the attention to the Planning Commission that is Planning and Zoning related now would be the time to speak you don't want to move that to the end of the meeting I a Afra all right seeing none we will move into meeting minutes from June 11th 2024 anyone to have any changes or additions motion by commissioner Stanley thank you sir second second by commissioner M all in favor say I I any opposed motion carries item two meeting minutes July 9th 2024 anyone have any additions or notations all right we'll move to a need a motion I'll make a motion motion by commissioner Ryan thank you sir do I have a second second second by commissioner Washington all in favor say I I I any opposed motion carries item number one owning variant quasa judicial 56 5260 Mount Plymouth Road owners Elven alvara Mar I'm gonna destroy this margios Alo applican Julian Cotto has anyone from the board had exp parte communication on this matter no seeing none we will turn it over to Mr s good evening this is jinon plan two this is a request for a zoning variance of the property located at 5260 Mount plimus rout the property is currently zoned agriculture future land use is residential rule statement settlement sorry agricultural zoning district has minimum requirements of lot size of 2.5 acre and lot width of 150 fit for a single family house development however a lot size of this property is 2.36 acres and L width is 145 ft therefore the applicant has applied zoning variance for single family house development the RC does not have any objection and Planning Commission de decision shall approve or approve with a condition or denial step and cont are available for any questions does anyone anyone does anyone have questions of Staff the applicant here and do they have a presentation I I actually did have I actually did have a question in reading through this um request I understand that it's slightly smaller so the question that as I was reading it is there a point where we as uh a council would say okay that's too small how does how does that get figured I did read where it is individual and I certainly understand each one comes on their own Merit but I was just reading that at some point there will be a person you know come before this you know committee so for um agriculture zoning so that's because it's it's written as a um standard um the zoning V variance was required for him to apply um so for like for example like lwis can be um can be like Exempted with the um what was it administ adjustment yeah administrative adjust yes but um lot sizewise it cannot be um Exempted with the um Ain ministrative adjustment so the um the applicant has no choice except for The Zing variant all right thank you I ask yeah I think just the bottom line it seems like because I read a couple times trying to make it out so it seems like basically there was inconsistency between the AG zoning and the plat is that right yes there's a gap yes so right now we're trying to you know eliminate the Gap is that right yes okay therefore it varies any more questions that no sir I would say that as commissioner M alluded to it's doesn't set a precedent it doesn't give anybody free reign and and again I think that's the question that you had asked I think it's more that would be relevant to us because we are the final Arbiter of this so 2.36 to 2.5 if five of The Neighbors showed up they were all notified and didn't want it then that's a different story but it's a a very small thing now again we would if it was 1.5 then all of a sudden now it's a different deal but again with the fact that it was everybody was notified nobody has had any complaints and it's I think it's a small thing but it's just a one time deal the next guy if he has one that's 2.49 he still has to get a VAR but Mr chairman on that point though it just seems like this is strictly internal I don't think this has anything to do with neighbors we don't need to discuss this because we have uh you know a ag Zing says 2.5 and the plat says 2 point 2.6 three so small so they're just to me it's just administrative has nothing to do with neighbors not that we need to discuss this point that's just my point of view no okay but but I I would disagree under the context that okay the the rules are set up that it's 2.5 everybody that moves into that settlement says okay nobody can build five houses on a lot next to me it's you know it's spacing it's a rural settlement and then if you vary from that and allow somebody to get smaller and smaller Lots now you're affecting all those people that live in that settlement that don't want somebody next door to them in other words if you had a lot in 2.5 and then we approved 0. five now that neighbor is right next to you you can see him out your side door so I think and and from that my point was if the four people surrounding this lot came up and said no no no no no then all of a sudden now you have to take a breath and think about it because it's going to affect those people I think the fact that it's such a small variance you know I could drive by that lot and there that's 2.5 I can't tell 2.5 and 2.6 so I think that would be why I think that the public would be but anyway I digress okay bring back to the board for a motion Mr chairman I'll make a motion approval of the variance thank you commissioner Stanley commissioner Stanley Mr chairman second Mr chairman you have to open up public hearing or public input on this good gracious I'm sorry okay resend that does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter and I was belaboring the point of the public speaking on the matter how about that apparently went right over my all right commissioner Stanley would you like to your motion yeah I'll make a motion approval of the variant motion by commissioner sanley thank you sir do I have a second I'll second than you choice motion by commissioner Ryan second by commissioner Ryan you can have the next one alrighty all in favor say I I any opposed motion carried all righty site plan Florida Town Center multif family phase one major development plan owners Florida Apopka Phase 1 owner LLC applicant Andrew Town location Florida town center phase four Mr out thank you for the record Bobby H planning manager uh the property is located on parcel 4 of Floridian town center and this is a major development plan for apartment complex consisting 312 multif family units and 10 buildings that are three stories each uh parcel four is permitted in the Pud for Floridian Town Center for multifamily uh this is a 14o 7 acre size parcel and has a future land use of high density residential the site is access via Floridian Town Center Boulevard in kioa Avenue consistent with the p master plan a total of 493 parking spaces are provided on site 15 are accessible 30 are electric car parking and charging stations consistent with the PD master plan storm water retentions provided in the middle of the site and on the sides architectural elevations are consistent with the approved master plan and the development review recommends development Review Committee recommends approval and the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the Floridian Town Center multif family phase one major development plan uh staff and the applicant are available for questions thank you Mr how anyone have questions of Staff no sir right anyone have questions of the app I'm sorry okay of Staff commissioner Ryan was originally supposed to be a YCA there no that was supposed to be on parcel 7 this was always contemplated to be multif family yeah all right does anyone from the public here wish to speak on this matter oh you do okay all right is the applicant present your name and address for the record please sir Andrew mcau with G Consultants are there any U government loans or guarantees involved in this project uh no I don't believe so no no no government loans this is all being privately financed okay thank you um one other thing I see you've got the EV charging stations and you got plenty of U parking for people with disabilities do you plan to add any um EV charging stations with accessibility for people with dis disabilities um no the engineer is here as well yeah I I know it's um it's a has to do more likely yes J rather than Ada but sorry James newent with Donald McIntosh Associates were the Civil Engineer record for the project there are EV charging stations at set on the plans uh at specific not specific but uh periodic locations throughout the site where we've already anticipated that I don't believe there's a specific Ada requirement but we try to accommodate all the potential residents that will be in the apartment complex so yes sir there are charging stations at some of the Ada spaces you said there are some EV charging stations that will be ada8 be yes sir accessible for people with disabilities yes sir okay wasn't on the plan so um they'll be in more detail we currently have a um construction site plan under review at the city that provides more detail on the parking spaces the site geometry and where the locations are for all the charging stations than you yes sir any more questions no sir thank you sir yes sir is there anyone from the public wishing to speak on this matter thank you commissioner motion by commissioner Norwood do I have a second second second by commissioner Mt all in favor say I I any opposed motion carries all right site plan number two Wild Oaks replat owners Kelly Park VB Development LLC applicants Kimberly horn and Associates care of Kevin Robertson PE location 3434 West Kelly Park Road Miss Sanchez good evening Jean Sanchez with the Planning and Zoning division this is a request to recommend approval of the Wild Oaks replant the subject property is situated west of State Road 429 South of Kelly Park Road and East of golden gem Road it's approxim it's approximately 152 acres in size the applicant has submitted the replat to establish storm water tracks and create nine Lots while including the recently acquired properties located in the southwest corner of the of the development site flat is consistent with the Kelly Industrial Park major development plan approved by City Council on February 7 2024 the Kelly Industrial Park phase one construction site plan approved by the development Review Committee on April 17 2024 as well as the Madison Oaks construction site plan approved by the development Review Committee on July 23rd 2024 the DRC recommends approval the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the w o replant staff and applicant are available for questions thank you m Sanchez anyone have questions of Staff no sir all right does anyone have question of the a very well is anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion I'll make a motion Mr chairman to recommend approval of the Wild Oaks replat thank you sir motion by commissioner Stanley do I have a second he second second by commissioner Washington all in favor say I I I any opposed motion Carri item number three Crossroads at Kelly Park 1B plat owners Gavin Land Services LLC and Kelly Park land Investments LLC applicants polos and Bennett Cara Melissa Martinez location 43 3 38 onich Road Miss Sanchez for the record Jean Sanchez with a Planning and Zoning division this is a request to recommend approval of the crossroads at Kelly Park phase 1B plant the subject property is located south of onich Road and East of Round Lake Road approximately 20 29 Acres the applicant has submitted the crossroads at Kelly Park face one B plat for consideration creating 140 residential Lots as well as Ali and park tracks and easement the plat also creates nine tracks for open space and amenities it is consistent with the Kelly Park property major development plan approved by the city council on August 3rd 2022 as well as the crossroads at Kelly Park phase 1B construction site plan approved by the development Review Committee on October 4th 2023 access to this pH of the crossroads development is proposed on Kip Park Road via way point Boulevard as well as connections to the proposed and future developments to the South North West and East adjacent properties the DRC recommends approval the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the crossroads at Kelly Park phe 1B plant staff and applicant are available for questions thank you Miss Sanchez anyone have questions of Staff commissioner Ryan what are these setbacks on the front garage front loaded garages on the on the Lots what are the setbacks um I don't recall we don't have minimum and maximums um in the Kelly Park in a change form based code area um but the this phase the mdp as well as the CSP has been approved and those would be on the construction site plan I'm sorry I don't recall construction site plan details yeah I don't think we can change it at this time but there's something in the future to look at just want to make sure that someone can park a car in a driveway not block the sidewalk okay you follow me yes sir like F-150 which is a very common vehicle in city of Bakka I think it's 21 feet long if I recall so it needs to be like 22 feet just from the sidewalk okay duly noted um sorry my mic wasn't on this is in the neighborhood character zone of the form based code area and there's a minimum front yard setback of 15 and a maximum of 30 so there is a range so with with a garage you have only have 15 feet apology I yes because it's a uh what they call a TR tnd type design neotraditional type design so it's like a Baldwin parkes Area the form based code area is so concern is you know in these small lots and these small really compact in people don't park their cars in the garage they store stuff in the garage for for the most part not everybody and a lot of times a vehicle is blocking the the sidewalk that's just something we need to look at down the road understand thank you apologies about me misspeaking about the um setback requirements it totally I missed I missed the ranges in the Cal Park and interchange form based code but yes it's range and I sorry I don't recall exactly what it is it it might very well be do you 22 feet um I know this has been touched on by a city council member before so okay commission yes this is just a probably a typo on the um staff report that we received uh it says propose use 175 single family lives but then you mentioned um in the project summary says 140 is that a typo yes it is it's 140 so you should do okay any more questions of Staff no sir any questions of the app um unless she is no they're not unless you're it no there's not applicant she is she is the applicant okay do you have any questions to the appli I did should make up one at this point all right does anyone here from the public wish to speak on this matter that would be no bring it back to the board for a motion Mr chairman I'm a motion to recommend approval of the crossroads at Kelly Park phase 1B plat thank you sir motion by commissioner Washington do I have a second second by commissioner Norwood all in favor say I I I any opposed motion car Bronson Peak phase 2A plat owners DRP Florida 5 LLC applicants polos and Bennett LLC care of GW Labuda location north of boyca Road and West of Galaxy Boulevard Miss Sanchez Gan Sanchez with the Planning and Zoning division this is a request to recommend approval of the Bronson Peak phe 2A plant the the subject property is filed north of Boy Scout Road and West of gallway Boulevard approximately 14 acres in size the applicant has submitted the brons and Peak Phase 2 a plat to create 88 Lots as well as rideway and Alley tracks access is on boycot road via ravenhurst place the plat is consistent with the ridge major development plan approved by the city council October 13 2021 and the ridge BD parcel 2 construction site plan approved by the development Review Committee on June 16 2022 the DRC recommends approval the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the Bronson Peak phase 28 plat staff and applicant are available for questions right thank you Miss Sanchez anyone have questions of staff I have question commissioner Ryan how wide are the lots with the back alley the ones in the alley is under 50 foot width which is what requires an alley in our code so it's actually a mix of um standard Lots um do you recall the width of the single family it's a mix of standard lots and Bungalows um 20 to 25 feet um the yes the smaller Lots the Bungalows yes sir the small slots correct so what what can you build on that on 20 foot lot with I will let the applicant answer that they can build on it thank you Jen Labuda with pist and Bennett 2602 East Livingston Street Orlando Florida um G mentioned these are all I think town homes and Bungalow style so they're connected if I'm not mistaken [Music] any more question to the applicant no sir thank you ma'am anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter bring it back to the board for a motion I'll make a motion Mr chairman to recommend approval of the Bronson Peak Phase 2 a plat thank you sir motion by commissioner Stanley do I have a second a second second by commissioner m all in favor say I I any opposed motion carries do have uh any old business uh one item I'd like to bring up for new business very briefly a question actually for for Mr how um the there was a we had in front of us a uh cleric Ona Road Project It was a commercial building or a commercial property and we changed the zoning to Industrial right at the um gosh I can't think of the Side Road there um anyways it's it's it's the side of the property faces residential houses and you know which one I'm talking about on clar road is it near keing Road no not ke Road oh why does it Escape me Landscaping Company Stone Road yeah border Stone Road yes and and this is why I think it's relevant to to us on the board it was they were initially going to we've zoned it and then they were going to ask for a special exemption and then they were told that they didn't need a special exemption as long as they followed an out the outdoor storage 14 regulations blah blah blah blah blah um the mixed use residential districts outdoor storage areas shall be located at rear developments principal buildings in other zones outdoor storage shall be located on the side or rear development okay they're on the side but the the the relevant thing here is outdoor storage shall be enclosed in either a wall made of masonary consistent with of primary buildings on the wood lot vinyl or combinations such as masonry wall and metal fencing the Highland wall fence shall be sufficient to screen stored materials from public view right aways private file y y y okay so they didn't ask for the variance and it was all approved based on them following those rules and we we as a board make a decision to to do the zoning it wasn't a variance but had we made the decision or was a variance and we would decide that okay if you follow these rules then we'll give you the variance to do that and I only know this because two different people who live on that road have asked me about it and I drove by and looked at it and the side of the building where they were proved to do their storage there's the the fencing is torn down there's Pilots stacked up 15 feet over the H so the three or four people that live across the street from that look at that every day initially when they did it they kept everything really nice my question is and I know we have to take that in consideration okay here's the rules they have to follow but if they don't follow them is there really any recourse other than the people calling code enforcement because both parties that spoke to me have called code enforcement at least four times each person okay and it's never been resolved so I think that's pertinent to us that when we're making a variance if it's a variance a guy wants to put his pool deck within eight feet of the property instead of 10 that's not a big deal but when it's something like that where it's going to affect people long term if they don't follow the rules and and and and I'm not trying to be derogatory to code enforcement but if they're powerless or toothless and nothing happens then we need to really consider that when we're giving a variance wait a minut we give a variance they might not follow the rules and then the end result is these people are going to suffer because they wanted a variance to do something that wasn't allowed and we allowed them to make an exception yeah so in this case if I recall this was for a landscape company I think I don't even know what it is they did a remember the guy was here in front of us and we and and some people from that street were here okay and we changed the zoning and then they were going to come back and ask for an exception to do storage right and then I I have the correspondence here where Jim said no if you follow these rules you don't have to have an exception that it's allowed under that mixed use is allowed storage is allow outdoor storage is allowed so usually the course of action in situation like this would be for one to contact code enforcement um I can follow up with them about this and see what what the status of this is uh when we review a plan or like a resoning or something then and we have to react to the standards that's presented the information that the applicant's presenting to us so yeah there is the possibility that somebody might once they build something do stuff that's outside the realm of code or you know become a nuisance to their neighbor but when we review it as a staff we have to look at just the facts that are presented to us and what the code says they can and can't do when a special acception comes before this board they the applicant has demonstrated that they comply with the 12 or 13 standards I think there are in the report that they're going to comply with it if they're out of compliance then it' be my understanding be more of a Code Enforcement issue but I mean and I'm not asking you to go rattle the cage of Code Enforcement because the the the homeowners have called in and that take its due Court I'm just saying that from my standpoint I look at that okay so looking at this now I question my decision going yeah we'll change that zoning allow this guy to do that because now the long-term effect is those people got EX L what they said they didn't want and we assured them that they wouldn't get that that will make them follow the rules and now they're not so I I understand I mean I'm not I'm not asking you to go rattle somebody's cage I'm just bringing that up and saying that we need to take that in consideration it's not like the the normal recommendation we send that when we make that recommendation that's it it's done so that that's relevant that my only Point yeah and this board approves special exceptions I mean in a lot of cases hindsight's 2020 you know but I mean we have to only react to facts they're presenting and somebody's giving us testimony that they're going to meet all the requirements of the code we as a staff then we have to pretty much recommend approval especially if it's a cuse Judicial matter we're required to recommend approval of it provided they meet all the requirements of the code and comp plan but um yeah that it's like one of those kind of things hide sight 2020 I understand and then the second thing that I would add very quickly would be what commissioner Ryan brought up about the parking M if I'm not mistaken you can be written a ticket if your car is the back of your car is hanging over the sidewalk it's Happ to me doesn't have to be parked on it if the bumper is on the sidewalk you can get a ticket in the city of Apopka right that happened to me uh when I lived in Orange County well I think you would be really touchy about the link of the driveway at that point this was a long time ago I got over it until now okay who benefits by allowing them to have a foot driveway and and like he said I think the driveway should be 25 foot right who who benefits from that the homeowner doesn't really benefit they're going to suffer the consequences it's in front of the sidewalk the only person who benefits is the developer because they get to squish more square footage into per lot so as Mr Ryan suggested and I I wholeheartedly concur I think that the minimum should be up to what take the average of what a vehicle is and if you take the percentage of trucks on the road and big SUVs on the road 15 foot right so needs to be addressed and okay the minimum is 22 and A2 ft or whatever so there is no option if a customer or somebody a resident buys a property he can park in his driveway and not be hanging over the sidewalk unless he tries to park two cars so the Kelly Park form based interchange code where the majority of these plats were this evening it's what's called a new urbanist neotraditional design code it's supposed to be like a Baldwin Park or celebration type development there is the most of them I'll use that word I can say that one most of them have backloaded parking in Bal Park they don't have driveways and our code requires if you have a lot that's 50 foot or less to be rear loaded right so and so we saw one where they had less than 50 foot Lots the lots that are over 50 feet they can be front loaded so in the form based code area there's different what they call character ons neighborhood um transitional interchange Village Center and there was one more employment I believe it is in the neighborhood character Zone there's a range of setbacks a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet so if somebody comes in and they're proposing a development where they're saying my house is going to have a range of setbacks on this street I have one here 15 13 18 the code says they can do it I mean we're Bound by the code and that's my point maybe the code needs to be addressed yeah and the form based code was written I think it got adopted in 2016 I believe something well it's not like we don't change it all the time it's in front of us all the time to be changed put that on the next list of the when we have a change Fest on it yeah all right I appreciate it thank you all right I'll shut up so I can go home I have one item of business uh just wanted to remind everybody on the 10th of September at 3M is the joint workshop with the city council for the comprehensive plan rewrite that's not really a comp plan issue and on that point I had asked about would we get any be prepared for discussion with any documents please come yeah we'll have the documents we've been working with the East Central Florida Regional planning Council uh they got hired to do this job in 2021 so we're finally getting to the Finish Line on this there's been some snags but we're getting there um they have prepared um the draft Dr son in our office has been kind of taking the lead on reviewing that working with the regional planning Council he's done a fantastic job on that and we will have those drafts out to you uh hopefully a couple weeks before the meeting uh because it's quite a big undertaking to read that um if you have trouble sleeping at night you might want to read that before you go to bed but um but in all seriousness it it's a big read and it's a lot but you know be prepared to come with ideas suggestions but remember a comprehensive plan it's a policy document it does not guide like a land Dev elment code does and so it be kind of set up very similar to the transportation element that was recently adopted all right there's nothing else for