[Music] [Music] [Music] all [Music] for I [Music] [Music] good evening this is the May 1st 2024 seal County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting please stand for the pledge of allegiance to app United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all this board is a seven member board appointed by the board of County Commissioners a quorum has been established to hold tonight's meeting public hearing items acted upon by this board are referred to the board of County Commissioners for further consideration board members present tonight starting with commissioner Carissa La Lan um me chairman Dan Lopez commissioner Richard German and commissioner Brandy I Apollo staff present tonight are Dale Hall Planning and Zoning manager Nissa borer Deputy County attorney Vladimir sanowski development review engineer manager Joy Giles principal planner and Tammy Brushwood pnz board clerk tonight's meeting will go as follows staff will introduce the item the applicant will present the item audience members wishing to speak will then be heard please complete a comment card and give it to the clerk if you wish to speak comment cards are located in the lobby speakers should restrict their comments to information directly related to the item being heard audience speakers will have three minutes to or six minutes if representing a group when called speaker should approach the microphone providing their name and address for the record the board may ask questions of the speaker all speakers after all speakers have been heard public comment will be closed the applicant will be given a chance for rebuttal any items shown such as videos presentations pictures or Maps must be left with the clerk for the public record items shown from electronic devices should be emailed to the clerk a motion will be made and seconded board discussion may occur and conclude with a vote I will request a roll call for any split votes the first item on the agenda is the approval of the proof of publication do I have a motion so moved second we have a motion in a second all in favor all next next item will be the public hearing items do I have a motion so moved I'm sorry uh would be the um minutes the minutes yes I second all in favor I I excellent all right next will be the public hearing items uh first on the agenda will be the the revas commercial rezone Joy Giles presenting good evening Joy Giles principal planner for the Planning and Development Division the applicant is requesting a rezone from excuse me the applicants requesting approval of a rezone from A1 agriculture to C3 General commercial and wholesale on approximately 78 Acres located on the west side of West State Road 426 uh approximately 500 ft north of connection Point uh the subject site is currently developed as a single family resident residence under the existing A1 zoning classification the applican is requesting the reone from A1 to C3 to develop or to redevelop the property from a single family residence to an undetermined commercial development in compliance with the C3 zoning regulations the property has an existing future land use of industrial which permits the C3 zoning classification the property has an existing access on a West State Road 426 which is classified as an urban principal arterior arterial this is an exist there is an existing 14t wide paved trail known as the cross Seminal Trail located along along the west side of West State Road 426 therefore the developer will not be required to construct a sidewalk along the RightWay at time of uh engineered site plan review the development must meet all requirements for parking access maximum building height minimum open space requirements permitted uses maximum F and will be evaluated for buffer requirements at that time the purpose and intent of the existing uh industrial future land use is to identify is to identify a variety of heavy commercial and Industrial land uses oriented towards wholesale distribution storage manufacturing and other industrial uses the L use should be located with direct access to rail systems collector and arterior roadways and as infi development where the use is already established as previously stated State Road 426 is an urban principal arterial and as such meets the intent of the comprehensive plan under comprehensive plan policy flu 17.5 evaluation criteria of property rights assertions the reasonable use of property is a use which does not adversely affect the public health safety morals or welfare and is compatible with the abiding or approximate properties and is otherwise the use that is consistent with the generally generally accepted land use principles staff finds a requested rezone from A1 to C3 to be consistent with the comprehensive plan and compatible with the surrounding trend of development in the area excuse me put that back there all of the properties on the west side of West State Road 426 lines South of West Chapman Road in north of Aloma Woods have an industrial future land use which allows for industrial commercial and office uses and permits the requested C3 zoning District further the properties to the west and south are zoned to permit C1 retail commercial C3 General commercial and wholesale and M1A very light industrial uses therefore staff requests that the board of County Commissioners adopt an ordinance enacting a reone from A1 to C3 on approximately 78 Acres located on the west side of West State Road 426 approximately 500 ft north of connection Point thank you any questions from the board for step see none is the I I guess I do go ahead commissioner Joy how come you go on C3 when it's next door to C1 just curiosity well C3 is a permitted zoning under the industrial land use and there are C3 uses approved in the area so uh staff felt that it was compatible okay and that was okay with the applicant that's what the applicant requested okay thank you any other questions from the board all right is the applicant present Philip Hollis pmjs development Solutions representing Mr revas and U address 263 monca Beach Way new Mna Beach Florida um wow there's nothing I can say staff Joy did such a good job on her presentation uh we concur with staff comments and would be available to answer any questions you might have any questions from the board for Steph I mean for the applicant all right thank you sir we have a gentleman by the name of Brian Taylor wishes to speak good evening Commissioners um my name is Brian Taylor um I'm at 2171 South Terrace Boulevard in Longwood uh just want to state that I'm in uh full agreement with the project and I think it's a great fit for what's going on on Aloma um on the uh adjoining nextd door Property Owners on the two Parcels that are in the white um just wanted to say uh keep it simple and say I think we should do it thank you thank you any additional comments from from the audience seeing none any discussion from the board anybody wish to make a motion I'll make the motion um I'll recommend that the um we recommend to the board of County Commissioners they adopt the an ordinance enacting a reone from A1 agriculture to C3 General commercial and oldale on approximately 78 Acres located on the west side of State Road 426 approximately 500 ft north of connection Point second we have a motion to approve and a second any further discussion all in favor any opposed hearing none the motion passes all right moving on to number two of the agenda the lake emo Self Storage small scale F future land use map Amendment and PD reone Joy Giles presenting yes the applicant is requesting approval of the Lake Emma self- storage smallscale future land use map Amendment from commercial to plan development and rezone from C2 retail commercial to PD plan development on approximately 1.26 Acres located on the east side of Lake Emma road approximately 250 ft south of Lake maray Boulevard the subject site is currently developed as a retail commercial center in compliance with the existing commercial featured land use and the C to uh retail commercial zoning District the applicant proposes to redevelop the property from the 15,000 ft multi-tenant commercial building to a self- storage facility with a floor area ratio of 1.96 and a maximum Building height of 50 ft the Simo County Land Development code classifies Self Storage as an industrial use which is not permitted under the existing commercial future land use designation the commercial flu has a maximum floor area ratio of 0.35 and the industrial flu has a maximum floor area ratio of 0.65 therefore the applicant is requesting a future land use amendment to plan development which provides for a variety of intensity intensities and uses the site is located within the EXC me oops the site is located within the uh Lake Mary Boulevard Gateway Corridor overlay the purpose and intent of the overlay is provide uniform design standards to establish high quality and well landscape development prevent visual pollution of building Heights that may not be compatible with the surrounding character of development and maximize traffic circulation functions from the standpoint of safety roadway capacity and vehicular movements the overlay restricts the maximum Building height of all structures to 35 ft requires a minimum of a 15t wide landscape buffer along the west perimeter adjacent to Lake Emma Road with specific buffer components and requires a minimum of a 50-ft building setback the applicant is requesting a variance from the maximum Building height and the minimum landscape buffer requirement through the PD rezone to allow for a maximum Building height of 50 ft A reduced landscape buffer along Lake Emma road to 5T I would like to bring it to the board's attention that the proposed master master development plan in your agenda as well as the Agenda Report states that the applicant is requesting a setback of 25 ft which is also a variance from the 50ft setback required from the overlay however we did have a discussion yesterday and the applicant is amable to providing a 50ft building setback the applicant's justification statement for the requested PD zoning District references three existing commercial developments uh commercial establishments for comparable building Heights the Top Golf entertainment establishment which is approximately a/4 mile south from the subject site The Academy Sports retail store which is located in the shopping center directly behind the site and the height place like Mary hotel located approximately a half a mile west of the site staff has evaluated the justification statement and has determined that the topof facility is under the City of Lake Mary's jurisdiction and is not located within the Lake Mary Boulevard Corridor overlay so it does not have to meet the standards of the 35 ft Building height The Academy Sports retail store has a maximum Building height of 35 ft uh however it does have a parit that is higher than that but the building itself does meet the 35 ft requirement the high place Lake Mary Hotel was approved in 1993 with a building height of 45 ft which was 3 years after the overlay was adopted the hotel was considered to be comp compatible with its height due to its proximity to the I4 ramp the development proposes to utilize the existing access onto Lake Emma road which is classified as an urban major collector Public Works does have concerns about the existing access in relation to large moving trucks and trailers successfully M maneuvering in and out of the site if the proposed development is approved by the board the existing access and medium will be further evaluated to determine if a left turn median cut will need to be removed and redesigned uh to ch analyz traffic flow the comprehensive plan sets forth comprehensive plan sets forth uh criteria to evaluate proposed future land use amendments for compatibility these criteria include whether the character of the surrounding area has changed enough to Warrant a different land use and intensity the surrounding area along Lake Mary Boulevard uh from I4 to Reinhardt Road primarily consist of office and Retail commercial development located in unincorporated seminal County as well as the City of Lake Mary seino County's Comm commercial future land use limits the F to 0.35 and does not permit industrial uses such as Self Storage the Simo County Land Development code sets forth criteria for approving plan developments the proposed development must be consistent with the comprehensive plan and effectively Implement performance criteria contained therein in addition it must be determined that the proposed development cannot re ably be implemented through existing provisions of the Land Development code and that the PD zoning would result in Greater benefits to the county than that of under conditional zoning while the proposed development meets the minimum required open space of 25% for the PD zoning designation and proposed building setback in compliance with the overlay the master development plan has not demonstrated how the PD zoning results in Greater benefits to the county than development under conventional zoning the proposed 5ft wide landscape buffer along Lake Emma road does not meet the minimum 25- ft buffer requirement that our standard Land Development code um buffer ordinance would require nor does it meet the minimum 15ot wide buffer requirement of the Lake Mary Boulevard Gateway Corridor overlay the proposed Building height at 50 ft is not in compliance with the overlay and is out of character for the area the uh proposed floor area ratio ratio of 1.96 is much more intense than the surrounding commercial developments with a maximum floor area ratio of. 35 and the industrial use of Self Storage is not consistent with the surrounding established commercial uses in conclusion in conclusion staff finds the request of future land use Amendment and PD reone to be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan policy flu 2.9 determination of compatibility in the plan development zoning classification also inconsistent with Simo County Land Development code part 25 PD plan development review criteria as well as inconsistent with part 56 Lake Mary Boulevard Gateway Corridor overlay standards including sections 30.10 65 Building height section 30.10 66 required Corridor buffer width section 30.10 66b required Corridor buffer plantings and placement as well as section 30.10 71 additional zoning variance criteria therefore staff requests that the board of County Commissioners deny the requested smallscale future Lan use map Amendment and current concurrent rezone as per the following based on staff staff's findings and the testimony and evidence received at the hearing the board finds that the request does not meet the identified portions of the comprehensive plan and moves to deny the requested smallscale feature land land use map Amendment from commercial to plan development and based on staff's findings and the testimony and evidence received at the hearing the board finds the request does not meet the identified portions of the simal County Land Development code and moves to deny the requested reone from C2 to uh PD and the associated development order and master development plan and this concludes my presentation thank you any questions from the board for for staff have a couple okay um Joy what is there what is on the site now it is a um commercial center it there is a restaurant um there are a few I believe a few of of the tenants are vacant at this time I think that there was a retail shop in there at one point it's old isn't it not it is it's quite old yeah I believe an insurance office was there as well can you go back a couple slides to that the one before that actually are you able to show us just kind of draw on a map where the Lake Mary Boulevard Gateway quarter overlay falls on that because you mentioned that some things are outside of it yes so it actually runs it actually runs um west of I4 down to marol and then it runs all the way East down to um let me see I can tell you the exact Road let's see to uh Sanford Avenue but cut off here somewhere between Top Golf and Academy Sports oh forgive me so it from the center line of Lake Mary Boulevard it runs South and North 320 ft so everything within 320 ft of that Center Line is included and how many feet away is this uh this is 3 and um let's see excuse me it is 291 ft from the central line so they're about what would that be about 29 ft to the Bay yes cor any other questions from the board for staff I may have some but I want to hear from them okay anybody else okay good all right is the applicant present good evening everyone my name is David Stokes I'm with Madden Stokes we're the civil engineer we're here on behalf of the Huber group the applicant and Alan Bradley uh with the Huber group is here with me as well um just want to thank joy and staff for preparing their report uh it's a long one there's a lot going on with this property and I have prepared a few slides to answer a few questions that you probably have um I think with this property um you know was done back in the 80s it's a retail commercial um the access is through an easement that also serves the gas station it's you know just pretty old it's been there a long time the area has changed um and so I think some of the context of the surrounding areas and how things have changed and are changing are important as well as some of the specifics of some of the criteria yeah so we're trying to open this up so they can actually see no problem and I'll kind of talk a few things while she's looking at that and then when we get the exhibits going I'll Point them out um you know the applicant when they first submitted this thing was submitted as a five-story 60ft tall building and through the process of negotiating with staff uh it has been reduced down to a four story 50ft building um some of the comments in the staff report about um building finishes you know window treatments and brick and things like that um for the most part the applicant has agreed with staff outside of the stone or brick criteria is something they don't feel is applicable to the style of the project the self storage and um it's kind of not the product that they do and they do a lot of these types of buildings throughout the throughout the central Florida area um the a few of things I point out when the slide gets up here help make more sense is you know the access and the buffer along Lake Emma are kind of tied together because of the existing there we go some of these meal quick through uh pretty quickly um so this is an elevation of the building shows you kind of what it looks like uh that is the four-story 50ft tall building and this is your view from you know Lake Emma Boulevard for the most part um slightly from a Northerly looking to the southeast General approach there so what do I click so uh these these uh these slides with the exhibit on the top have been provided to staff and already in the report but I thought it would be good to show them to you guys as well and talk through them um regarding the uh board's comments about the distance with the Lake Mary Boulevard overlay being 300 20t from the center line this exhibit shows you our building location relative to that uh on the closest side the building the building itself not the property line but the building is 304 ft from the center line and on the left side which is your western side the building is 312 ft from the center line and of course the overlay says any building within 320t has to comply with that 35t criteria so it's a small SLI of the building and something else that we feel is important is that this property does not Front Lake Mary Boulevard it fronts Lake Emma and it has since the 1980s and so I think the amount of encroachment as well as the proximity of how the property fronted uh fronts you know where your access is from your view corridor um the context of that matters you know um there's a gas station between us and the road and there's a ginormous shopping center surrounding us to our south and east as well um so I think we go to the next slide actually uh yeah let's go to the next slide can you point out where the gas station is directly north it's directly north so where the 312 text is that's that's the facility there okay if we actually scroll down a little bit for me Alan um I just go ahead and point out uh go back yeah right there so on the left side of the site plan you'll see coming off the entrance there um there's a sharp curve and it goes due north that is the alignment of the existing easement today and the reason why that's important is it ties into the driveway at the gas station at that specific spot and so from a um standpoint of trying to address uh the need for a larger buffer we have two fixed points physically for vehicles and driveways to get into the property the driveway exist the Ean exists and the gas station access exists today and so you basically have to come right there and turn right away and go do North to get there so the ability to the ability to provide a 15t wide buffer would require the moving of a driveway that exists on someone else's property um which is obviously something we can't control as an applicant of this uh piece of property today um these next couple slides are just to show you the other properties that we' referenced in our justification statement for the building Heights yes we know they're far away um in terms of not being adjacent directly to the project but they're what we believe is still the general area and and the point of these slides and the last one is kind of to show you the general area and how things are have transpired and are going to transpire even more once other things happen so this is the hotel uh it's 45 ft um while certain approvals happened earlier this plan was approved in the early 2000s I think around 2007 uh it was approved by St John's um this is the former Kmart which is the new Academy and as Joy mentioned the building does comply the parit area which is probably the middle third roughly of the building I would say does uh reach a height of 53 ft um and that that was you know southeast of the property and then the next slide is top golf this one's unique it's obviously not s County jurisdiction um it's pretty close to the property and this one's unique in that it has extreme Heights uh the main lot which is lot one is the top golf facility uh the poles that support the the fencing are 170t tall and the allowance for the building is up to um 55 ft I believe and five stories the out parcel lot which is the bottom right of the screen uh it's not colored it's it's kind of empty is approved for up to a 10 story 100ft tall hotel as one of its allowable uses nothing is there today but that's an approved allowable use which is significantly higher than anything we're requesting today um this is just the survey uh in case we needed to zoom in and look at the easement or something U but again you can see that drive access as it comes off of Lake Emma and it goes for the most part you know du North and then uh connects to the gas station driveway and then what's not shown very well in the plan is there's a small retention Pond between the access Drive in Lake Emma as well as a small Swale um just on the South Side just below the bottom of the access drive as well so the reason for our request of the 5 foot landscape buffer simply we're just pinched on Space um you know um if we could move that drive or that drive didn't exist that wouldn't be one of our requests today U but the ements there the two points of connection are fixed um they've been long-standing points of access and so we have a small sever um and generally speaking utilities Public Works departments D they kind of frown upon when you plant trees and shrubs within their storm water well within storm water ponds in general uh they view it as a maintenance um potential challenge throughout the life of a project if you have trees and vegetation within the side slopes of Retention Ponds so those criteria kind of led us to the request for the 5 ft and I think we can go to the next one chairman over here hi may I ask a question of the applicant about the landscape buffer is it something I can wait until he's finished with his presentation well he just already had it up and we were on the subject but I'm I'm happy to hold off and wait as long as it's okay with it I'm fine perfectly fine with okay so um you know this property is located in the Lake Mary overlay and the landscape buffer buffers required to be 25 ft and I understand that you're requesting a 5-ft landscape buffer but there's a provision of the code as it pertains to additional variance requirements and that allows you to go to a 10ft buffer minimum if you're less than um 200 ft in depth and your property is more than that so I know you talked about the hardship as far as why you needed the landscape buffer to make the site work why you need a reduce to five but can you put on the record why you believe you can go to Five when the minimum is 10 if you have 200 I just don't know sure leg legally it's my opinion that you can't go to Five because the minimum is 10 and that's only if you have a depth of less than 200 feet but if there's something else you want to put on the record in this that's that's kind of why I stopped you just to cover that the reasons are the existing easement and the two existing access points you know the driveway is fixed off Lake Emma and more importantly the driveway to the north to the adjacent property which we don't own or control is fixed and TI to that easement as well and so you can see the teardrop shape to the area between the access drive and Lake so it's very wide on the bottom and it tapers to very narrow distance at the top and so that existing condition is what you know prompted the request and is the Restriction why we can't provide the larger one so how wide is that access easement I'm sorry I can't read it from here the drive AIS is roughly 20 feet okay yeah okay thank you yeah in coupled with that how how far is the dryve vi to where the build proposed building is going to go how much space is between that and the building let me look at that real fast so the drive aisle um it's kind of there you the north south portion of the drive aisle is about 70 ft to the building roughly on our plan we have the parking spaces on the bottom we have a um you know call it a dividing Island to separate the drive-thru um for the storage facilities people can pull up and do their dropping off their stuff for storage and not restrict access through the easement to the north we can't stop and park in that and do any kind of loading in that we' restrict people so you can't get because of the V you can't get much of a landscape buffer on the Lake Emma side but you do have quite a bit of footage then between the drive VI and the building so can you do a little more there in terms of landscape move the landscape around well that's what we're showing there with that that if if I if you're asking if we could just move the plantings to a different location such as this larger um Island adjacent to the parit and canopy is that what you're asking yeah I'm asking if you can add to since you can't get it on one side can you get it at least some additional landscape and some 20 it's still the same kind of buffering it's just in a different location so what what we've tried to do with if you can kind of Imagine The drrive a having some footage and then east of the dve so as we go right from that if you see I've got canopy marked in the middle there that' be a covered unloading and loading zone the main entry to the building but with a landscaped Island kind of anchoring that and then Landscaping to the north of it in front of those three parking spaces as well as Landscaping to the south of it in front of the bulk of parking spaces the attempt through providing that island and those extra ERS air in decreasing how many parking spaces we had originally shown down to this plan was trying to create more landscape buffer there Inland of the drive AIS cuz we're limited basically that's what I'm asking right everything west of the drive a between Lake Emma road and that drive a is quite fixed it's currently retention so what we tried to do was create some Inland of that while I I'm not able to make a loading and unloading zone or parking spaces within that drive aisle it has to be free and clear 22 ft so then kind of utilizing anything east of that for our uses while also adding in some some Landscaping because at the end of the day we don't want just a blank building 5T from the road we're trying to improve upon what's there there but he said he had 70 ft from the dry Val to the building that's a lot of footage I mean you you that can have has some parking spaces yeah in terms of width I'm talking about a roughly so you should have you should have some room to do some additional Landscaping that pil is about 20 ft wide so we do have room in that to do it yeah I mean we've without restricting access to the building that's where with the exception of you know kind of this distance and this distance what and unfortunately this doesn't show color on it no I understand but the intention was that this would be landscaped quite well this would be landscaped quite well and then this down here would be landscaped in addition to Landscaping here but to his point earlier if it's retention we can't really put canopy trees or understory trees in the retention area it'd be more um grassy areas shrubs in conjunction with every yeah there we go and so that those spaces what he's just colored in represent roughly 20 ft of width in addition to what is west of those so closer to Lake Emma how about up against the building without blocking your entry point I understand that the base yep and I mean we would be willing to do that and obviously doing truck turns there because a large part of this is fire truck access and then we have such a low volume of traffic that this type of use generates but it's typically a larger vehicle as you could reasonably understand but yeah we could we could definitely add some Landscaping onto the front of the building there plus the other points that he call right yes sir okay thank you did you get an opportunity to complete your presentation or oh you were still going when we interrupted on the Landscaping I'm sorry no that's quite all right that's why we're here so it's it's we're here to answer questions um yeah there is another slide there at the end the last one is the most important one I think it puts a lot of this into context um and terms of proximity and again it's very similar to the overall plan Joy showed earlier but this one has a one extra thing added that's eventually going to happen with I4 when it when they do their expansion and change their um access ramps so this plan is kind of the combination of everything like you've seen before with the addition of the future I4 offramp which will directly connect to Lake Emma Boulevard so you know with all the traffic going on today and with all the you know changes to the area that have happened and are going to continue to happen you know we all know that as access improves to areas development and you know moves to those areas more development is spurred to happen as access improves so you know today the intersection Lake Mary Boulevard and Lake Emma is is a pinch point it's a it's a challenging intersection so this Improvement by dot um is going to funnel all those trips that would be going down Lake Mary and then turning South on Lake Emma um to funnel right down to this portion of Lake Emma to make their decision so um you know this is something that they haven't started on yet of course but it's it's in the works something they're going to be doing in the near future um and it also shows on this plan the top golf The Academy Lake Emma art project and the Hyatt um just to the left of I4 there you you said or at the beginning somebody said something about you agree to additional building setback versus what yes we do agree to that um the plan already meets it actually it just something during the review you know it it uh kind of got Miss didn't come up but either way um the building is already set back more than the 50 Foot required and we're we we definitely comply and we agree with that um that well she had in here that that was part of your problem was the building setback but that's no longer a problem I understand that it was really never a problem it just it was in the report that way and when we talked to Joy the other day we we um confirmed that that's okay with us because we we already need it okay yeah right any questions from the board for the applicant I'm assuming you completed or I am done thank you you know I would add that you know we've worked in Cal County a long time uh and I think I can kind on one hand how many times we've left here without staff support um and before my time at this firm and uh so you know we appreciate all their hard work all the time and it's always our goal to try and get consensus there's just a couple things on this one that you know different circumstances and time and the area we just still disagree on a few things on so but we appreciate all their help your staff has always been amazing to work with and we always appreciate working with them so with that I am done okay thank you very much any additional questions from the board all right seeing none uh any any member of the audience wish to speak on this see none oh was there okay please come on up and when you get a chance please fill out a a comment card uh you'll find those in the in the lobby yes sir and please state your name and address for the record good evening everybody my name is Steven Garcia and I am a tenant at one of the um at the shops of Lake Emma and that's 3895 Lake Emma road and we're sweet 109 uh our business name is Blends at Lake Mary we're a healthy Cafe that we do um protein shakes protein Donuts it's something Energizer something for the community to have so they have a place where they can go and have something healthier than what usually is in the area we've been there going on a year now in may um the proposed um plan that's happening was new to us we didn't know that was happening we just found out maybe a week ago when they put this sign up um I'd like to say that because there's not many businesses there I will agree with that with the gentleman had mentioned earlier but allowing us to actually have that opportunity to open up as an entrepreneur first time doing a business and having our location there has been a godsent to us because they gave us an opportunity to become part of the community which we've created in that location not only do we serve the community there they allow us to also make a living by having that business there so we also appreciate that landlord allowed us to be there and the the um the uh position that we're in now to be able to serve everybody um with what's going on now I don't know if you guys have see the area you probably lived here longer than I have but um Lake Road is very busy it's a very busy road along with Lake Mary Boulevard and it is going to be difficult to have something like that building there in regards to it's my my humble opinion if I may um something like that this is no disrespect to the developers but something of that is actually going to be out of character in this neighborhood I've only lived here going on a year now year and a half and Lake um like Lake Mar is a very beautiful place and that area there I think doing a storage unit would actually hinder what is already there in regards to the academy and what's behind there being that that's a big Plaza and it's hidden behind and it's only the entrance space that's actually pretty high it doesn't really take away from what the area looks like on Lake Emma road um so I just wanted to say like you know for small business like myself um is a great opportunity to have something there as rental are not easily attainable for someone who's trying to open up a business and the opportunity has been great for us and we would like to continue being here and serving everyone and maybe one day hopefully serve one of you guys while we're there so I just wanted to say thank you for the time and the opportunity to speak and um if that helped in any way thank you very much I appreciate it thank you sir you sir sir take one of those and was there anybody else from the public that wishes to speak on the matter all right seeing none any further discussion from the board yes Mr chairman and Council I apologize for my late and I just want to know if I Can Vote or not on this issue since I was late I believe she can right yeah I mean you came in during the hearing so not not the previous one obviously that one's closed but this one you can so if you have any additional information or you want joy to go back through a presentation um she's going be happy to do that I'm good thank you we have some time did you did you need a good go good you good all right outstanding thank you I I'd like to ask Joy some questions come back Joy Based on that discussion we just had do you feel a little differently about all your recommendation well it doesn't it does not change staff's recommendation because it does not meet the requirement of the overlay the only variance to the overlay is um as nesa had had had previously mentioned um the the required landscape buffer can be reduced to a 10-ft buffer only if the um the depth of the lot does not meet the 200t I believe it was 200t minimum so that's the only you didn't like the compromise that he was offering well I I appreciate the compromise but I have to look at the code as it's stated and that's the only way that the overlay allows for the variance would me the landscape variance correct but he has an easement that he can't plant in I I I don't know how you Sol there's no way to solve that problem so anybody that builds there is going to have that problem well if I if I may um Naya borker Deputy County attorney for the record I think I think as we were going through it and they were explaining I think there's a couple questions here number one um can you utilize the 20 foot planting area in the um Island and on the North side and on the South Side depending on how wide that is to count towards your buffer um can that be utilized that was one of the questions I had and I don't think in any case the code doesn't allow for them to go to 5T it allows for 10 if you have you know less than 200 feet they have about 219 219 ft in width but it doesn't say you know the minimum is 10 if you have 200 but you can grant a variance conceivably between 25t and 10t right for 15t because 15t doesn't doesn't require you to have that less width right um but 5T no 10 ft they don't meet but you could do something in between 10 and 25 ft and I think joy and planning would have to look at could you count the width areas and the planting areas at the top and and then the bottom towards the width right and then maybe they could get there through that I'm not a planner but um that that's kind of my thoughts on it that you would be able to Grant if you decided you know approval for this you would be able to Grant a variance somewhere between 25 ft and 11 ft let's say for the buffer planting commissioner um I I I can share that uh during discussion with the applic applicant during view of the project um staff recommended that the existing retention Pond along the west side be moved in order to provide a buffer area and um it was stated that they wanted to utilize that existing Pond as it is so that they would not be able to use that for buffer staff recommended that since the the site is being redeveloped that it be redeveloped all the way to provide you know the most space possible for the buffer area okay so you saying that so you're saying that challenge can be overcome with the with the moving of the retention Pond I'm not an engineer so I don't want but but we felt that there was room for some more you know give and take that I mean to cut you off there commissioner German um well just one other thing Joy I've noticed that you started you guys are started under requested action or just plain action used to be that we got motions for both sides if we wanted to deny or we wanted to recommend approval you don't you only put in here two motions to deny nothing to if maybe I want to approve this and and that was by the way same on the first one maybe I wanted to deny and it only said and I don't know why why did we change that we used to do you guys used to give us the two alternatives and you don't do that anymore so maybe you could think about that you can that's not a legal question well um no but kind of okay so this this motion this requested action here um is staff's recommendation and their request I understand but we to get a choice right and and staff can still provide you with an alternate motion and that's fine I I know why procedurally that was excuse me been done away with I don't know it's not being done away with I can tell you why this looks a little different and that's because when I took over I crafted the language because there's certain legal requirements to have to go into I got it now I will tell you this if you do want to approve it I'll give you some guidance now um you have a staff report that recommends denial and so everything in the staff report basically sets out the evidence as as to why you should deny however then you have the applicant's testimony as to why it should be approved so you have um testimony on the record as to both sides right if you're going to approve it then you have to make your approval based on the applicant's testimony and the information that they've provided at the hearing and also you since um staff was recommending denial there was no development order prepared but the applicant did provide a development order so your recommendation of approval should include not only the approval of the comp plan but the rezoning with the PD development order that the applicant provided now if you've looked at that development order and there's any changes that you want um within that development order you'd have to state that for the record what changes that you you'd want to be made what can I talk to the applicant again can have can you know I think there's some things that you can work out here I agree um you want to get tabled or do you want you want to get whatever action we end up taking and you move forward just could we I think the landscape buer maybe is the item that may make a difference if it is we have a suggestion on how it could be addressed um if that would make a difference to the board this evening anything could make a difference I mean you know so so yeah if you want to present your suggestion that's fine the the challenge in the buffer just as they typically are applied is it would conflict with the easement in the retention Pond if there is a way that the buffer can be the language could be stated to allow um you know the buffer wear doesn't conflict with the easement and that trees could be planted in the sze slopes of the pond and the pond is allowed within the buffer and that if we um could relocate plantings to other areas of the property between the building and Lake Emma road so don't count it as a buffer but say we could move plantings there to help achieve the plant criteria that staff and the buffer are looking for um I think something along those lines is absolutely reasonable o can be worked out um I'm not sure there's things that the board has that are concerns but for that one I think there's ways to be creative and trying to appease all the sides for that item if I may interject Dale Hall planning and uh development manager this slide here I made sure to put this on is the list of items that did not meet the criteria of our code in our land use Amendment uh code in comp plan so yes the buffer width is one of those items but there are still incompatible inp compatibility issues and rezoning issues and uh land use issues and other building height issues and things that need to be considered also so it's it goes beyond just the landscape issue there's multitude of issues that need to be addressed on this one or considered you know this is a very difficult piece of property and what's there now really could use some Redevelopment in that's all I was trying to get to is a really something that is Improvement for what's there I don't think staff took that much into consideration uh to find some ways to help this in my opinion if I may please go ahead thank you please St your name Alan Bradley I'm with the Huber group so our company developed this Center originally in the 1980s we've been landlords of it this whole time and it is a unique uh circumstance we find ourselves in getting the opportunity to manage the center for that many years nonstop it's nearly 40 years old and those of us who have seen Orlando for that long and more specifically Lake Mary would be I think singing in unison that a lot has changed um we're looking at a project that has lived its life and is ready for its new life from our standpoint as owners and I think that the the difficulties with which the center sometimes has operated in recent years is evidence that times change um centers change uses within centers change who thought that a Kmart would become a gym or a sporting good store a movie theater would shut down or Office Buildings would become Apartments there's a lot going on not just in seol County not just in Lake Mary but in the greater area something that we ran into a lot through this process with staff that I think we would all acknowledge is a challenge there's not much language in 7el county for infill redevelopment and we're standing at the precipice of a lot of change in this area now if Chick-fil-A wants to close and become a Taco Bell code is clear on that and that fits but what we're talking about is self storage that if anyone has been a customer of and I don't mean of me but I mean of Self Storage in general in any in any location it's not an industrial use when you really touch it and feel it we're talking about a retail use we're talking about something that follows bedrooms we're talking about a use that is necessary to a human going through a life change it's weird to think about who needs storage but you may be moving you may have had a death in your family you may have had a divorce you may be downsizing upsizing you've got that parent moving in with you your child moving out your job moved you to another place so we follow Community we follow families we follow homes we don't usually go build on the outskirts of town and wait for the houses to follow um so this is a unique opportunity for Us in finding my way of how this meets the the desires of 7el County we're providing a necessary service we do a lot of our house in-house studies of how we Market who we look for and where we go and this area is greatly underserved for our product when I think about floor area rati IO we have a code that wants you to build a sea of parking with a tiny building that's only 30% of the whole lot we're talking about a very small infill piece of land here it's under an acre and a half so what you have there already does have a very large F compared to what code typically allows but it's the typical 100 parking spaces and a tiny little building today we have a building that sits on the property line with minimal Landscaping maximal lot development we're actually increasing open space with our proposed plan we're decreasing parking we're cutting our proposed trips and trip generation is a big deal in a heavily congested area like this we're cutting them in half now I know that when you look at Square footages are going up it's because this is a passive use it's an extension of a home and it's something very necessary for a lot of the new development that comes into Lake County or I'm sorry 7 County Lake Mary combining those um so I don't want to have to go down the steps of this but I believe that we are providing something that is compatible to the area well I'm not asking to build this in the middle of residential part of seol County I'm not asking to build this on a two-lane dirt road mod at the dead end I'm asking to build it at a reasonable intersection that does not have residential uses adjacent to affect somebody's life I'm asking to use a commercial use in place of a commercial use I'm asking to decrease the traffic on an already strained Network and in exchange for that I'm asking to build at a size that is appropriate for the area and appropriate for the economics to go up to four stories and and 50 ft which is in character with waivers that have been granted in the past as we proved by the hotel that is just west we're on the outskirts of the Lake Mary overlay without being fronting on Lake Mary Boulevard and at the end of the day we would like to Breathe new life into this location to take a tired blighted and difficult to run shopping center and replace it with something that serves the community is brand new looks great and costs a whole lot more money and brings a whole lot more Revenue to tax roles than what's currently there all right any more comments from the board thoughts questions personally speaking I like I like commissioner German's suggestion of tabling it and seeing if we can get some of these items addressed but uh that's my personal opinion I'd like to hear from the rest of you what what your thoughts are I I think we're close enough I I don't the only couple issues is the building height and they're getting penalized because they're 20 ft inside of a you know some phony baloney uh overlay that doesn't really mean anything um they've worked out the building setback so that's okay um I think there's a resolution here of the landscape buffer issue so that's going to be can be worked out and improved um so I don't I don't know that I see any issues to prohibit this thing moving forward in my opinion so based on that I'll make a motion that we recommend approval of the requested smallscale future land use Amendment from commercial to plan development and um the requested reone from C2 retail commercial to PD plan development and the master development plan I think uh the development order will need to be reviewed by staff again and that can make a recommendation I I don't I don't feel good enough about trying to add that to my Amendment for approval that staff can deal with that and then recommend to the commission as to that um and my motion would include the resolution of the buffer issue based on what was put on the record tonight with what they said they would do with the additional landscape uh and additionally work with staff between now and the commission meeting so I guess that's my motion we have a motion on on the floor do we have a second I'll second any further discussion on the motion yeah um I came in here tonight feeling after reading through our packet uh feeling that there were really a lot of asks in here um and little attempt at compliance um and I didn't see any I didn't see very obviously the benefit to the community uh that we were getting in return um I think my position has been a little SED um after this discussion and uh particularly in terms of benefit to the community by the most recent statement of the applicant um so I'll be supporting the motion y any other comments from the board I I agree um after his presentation it was really quite something to really understand that the times change and the need is there so I I agree okay all in favor of the motion I any opposed hearing none you guys have it thank you all very much okay going into closing business um Dale do you have anything for the board tonight uh yes I do there was some discussion emails that went around about um bringing up that the July meeting that we have for pnz commission is on July 3 so I wanted to bring that to your attention that that date was there uh knowing that July 4th is a holiday and also on September 4th is our meeting in September and the holidays uh September 2nd which is that Monday so again two days later we have this meeting and I just thought I'd bring it to the commission again and see if it is uh something you would want to discuss are there proposed dates to move them to I think we should move the July 3rd to the July 10th such a s a lot of people are away and it's the day before I I'm not sure that the Labor Day makes any difference it's Monday most people are back and they don't do you know it's two days later so I I July 10th is a is a opportunity yes yeah is that a motion huh I'll be out of the country well so you miss one yeah you July 10 so that's a motions I'll make a motion we move July 3rd to July 10th do we have a second I'll second that we have a motion on the table and is second to move to July 3rd meeting to July 10th any further discussion seeing none all in favor all right just this is the clerk hello I'm so sorry for my voice this is Tammy I just wanted to make sure that you also put for the record that it will be at 6 p.m. for that date 6 p.m. thank you part motion gu what you want July 10th at 600 p.m. for the rec oh okay I'm sorry make a friendly at 6 p.m. all right do we want do we want to do anything with the September 4th meeting date then that's two days after Labor Day I don't I don't think that's a big deal I agree I agree the reason the reason why we brought it up is some individuals take that week off either the prior week before the prior week after and again we're just bringing it to your attention no I appreciate that I think good okay yeah looks good on my calendar you all good all good all right okay good anything else no that's all we have tonight thank you all right does the board have anything else to discuss nothing all right well we call this meeting a Jour I really thought you had some comments from the [Music] n [Music]