##VIDEO ID:k6N6FEqlptM## we're going to call the meeting to order please stand up for the pledge of allegiance alance 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 Madame secretary can I get a roll call please sure Carmen Carmelo okendo present Philip lantry present Russell Alexander present Nanette Douglas present Don grisbee absent Don streer absent Daisy Snyder present thank you chairman we have a quorum Miss Snider is a voting member this evening full commission thank you very much if anybody's look of the minutes from the last meeting can I get a motion I'd like to make a motion to approve the meeting the meeting minutes from the last meeting I have a second I second I have first and second all in favor I I I anybody oppos All Passes we're going to start with the first order of business which is ordinance number 20 24- 49 uh it's code uh zma 34 24006 good evening uh planning commissioner members my name is Ralph Keith associate planner with the Community Development Department the case being presented to you today is for a zomie map Amendment for the project known as Clark property the property is made up of 10.31 acres of land is located south of perk Road and East of Michigan a the applicant is requesting approval of ordinance 202 2449 as well as staff recommends approval some background on this location the existing zoning is agricultural the proposed zoning is r1b single family the development is compatible with the surrounding area and no adverse impacts on City for facilities here are graphic representations of the future land use and Zoning Maps depicting the low density residential future land use and existing agricultural zoning district for for context honor before July 25th staff reviewed this project and recommends uh and recommends approval likewise as requested the plan commission also recommends approval of ordinance number 20244 49 for the Z map Amendment known as Clark property at this time staff and the applicant are available for questions thank you thank you any questions for staff or the client to come up good evening Jesse Anderson 2602 East Livingston uh Florida or Lander Florida that is I am from po Bennett and I'm the representative for the applicant tonight uh I can answer any questions we didn't prepare a presentation because the this is a Well Done by staff we we agree with their recommendation and we seek to keep going with the approval process so anybody have any questions for him while he's up there I have a question just for my reference it um you mentioned a quarter proposed Corridor toll road collector roadway which would what would that be Now The Collector roadway is actually the status of the roadway that there is in place for uh what we're budding towards so there are different variations there's arterial roadways collector roadways and local roadways this is established as a collector roadway by the city it won't need any taxes or anything like that per this this amendment okay any other questions um can we review the map again so this general property is in vicinity of a mix use development that you can see that's that shaded pink area that's to the left of your screens uh that's the rone bridge mixed use it's undergoing reviews currently the site also AB buts a uh a mix sorry small School site as well as another School site that's adjacent to it down the road so it is in vicinity for walkability for potential student generation that's going to come from it it has the potential future commercial that's going to really generate some more density in this area and we're trying to accomplish that but still continue that single family field thank you question thank you sir thank you at this moment we will open for public comments uh can I get Mr Sam these uh thank you um uh my name is Sam dues I live at Michigan Estates uh it's the um subdivision just north of there and uh uh I had just come the only comment I had was um that I think the existing zoning allows for development uh more than what it is right now and um I know that there are reasons that staff would would support this but I think um a more broader focus in what's going on in this area we it also that that collector roadway that they're referencing um also serves for the high school the Middle School the elementary school um there's not just my neighborhood and subdivision there's another subdivision just on the west side of Michigan and then there's a a large mixed use development that is not even 100% uh completed in construction yet so if anybody's driven down Michigan at any point in the morning or the afternoon you know there's there's a 2-hour window in the morning and a 2-hour window in the afternoon that can be you know quite cumbersome from a traffic perspective so there's times where we have a hard time even getting out of our neighborhood cuz U folks will get tired of the line and then they'll just pull off and park on our neighborhood and they kind of wait for their kids are kind of staged there um so the area traffic-wise is really already overburdened and um I don't think that's um anybody could really challenge that you can really it's it does not pass the eye test but when you're out there we have that other development that we haven't even begun to feel the effects of um I don't think it's even reached 25% of its full capacity yet as far as that development itself so um if you look at the map you can see a the adjoining properties and how how they're they're they're they're split Lots um and I think the intent with this rezoning is to go something even more dense than what is there adjacent so um I'm just asking for you guys to really take that into consideration in this area it's very very very busy it's very overcrowded right now and it is just a two-lane road while that is a collector it's classified as a collector it is still just a two-lane road so um please take that into account as you consider this project thank you very much thank you I'm sorry if you just restate your your address I know you stated your name would you state your address for the record uh my address for the record I at 531 Michigan Estate Circle St Cloud in St Cloud yes thank you sir yeah do we have any other public comments well at this time we will close public comments any comments amongst ourselves yes go ahead um good evening again so Jesse Anderson from pis and Bennett uh while I do appreciate the ey tests we do have specific tests that do go along with this type of review and application process first and foremost we are not changing the overarching density of the project that is governed by the future land use of the property which is retaining itself as low density residential it does allow up to a certain dwelling un per acre if I'm not mistaken that still continues at this time be four dwelling units per acre uh so this will not bridge over that whatsoever we are maintaining that on top of that uh any AM or PM Peak Travel time periods will be assessed during the subdivision construction plan process if this work to be approved and it cannot go over any level of service again during that time period which it should not because of the fact that is underneath the future land use that does establish that established level of service and then finally there will be required concurrency and Associated impact fees that will be paid to mitigate any offsite uh issues that could arise from this such as potentially expanding the way if that were to be something that would come from this but that would not be something that would come from this specific project alone so that's just some of the things that you can think about in terms of what mitigation tactics there would be as well as the fact that there are specific tests that we do have along the way to mitigate traffic thank you is there any just not not to this to uh to hear to this motion but um is there any opportunity of any comment of expanding Michigan avue at any time so during the traffic impact analysis If This Were to be approved uh there would be mitigation that would be required from the site any mitigation that would be required during that traff impact analysis that would be reviewed by staff they would determine what mitigation we would need to have for that right of way and we' comply with that so if they did for instance require that we would comply with it okay thank you I think unfortunately this is in one of those areas where we've seen over and over again residents really concerned about the traffic it is and that's the biggest issue and it's nothing you've done wrong or anything wrong with the zoning I mean everything you know all the boxes are checked except the one where you know a lot of residents in this area have concern about traffic and I think that's that's the biggest issue that we have absolutely understand that uh for traffic specifically it regards to both your your comprehensive plan and statute where there is concurrency uh language that allows for us to proceed through this type of process permitted that or provided that we are satisfying that level of service that is stipulated by your comprehensive plan and maintaining the level of service for that given roadway so at any point in time if we do not adhere to that level of service we cannot receive certificate of occupancy which means we cannot actually have units built on those properties and then filled with people if we do not meet the actual level of service that's guiding by your comprehensive plan so there are baselines in place to make sure we do not break that yes and I understand understand that I just you know for me it's the problem is this area until Michigan gets expanded or um gets a few extra Lanes on it um it's just it's going to be a huge problem in the future to it's it's just an area that's already super congested totally get that and there's still so many agricultural properties out there that haven't been converted all the way down all the way so all that depends on what people going to do with their and the development that we're putting forward gives the impact fees that pay for that type of expansion of the roadway so unless you would like for the city to be expending its own Revenue uh the way for it to be paid for is through development and the impact fees that are associated with it that again go back to that level of service that you know you guys set those fees to make sure we maintain that so that's again staff has gone through extensive research on their impact fees and concurrency to make sure that these standards are in place they update them every few years and so you know in the past there have been sure issues I actually used to work for S Cloud so I do know there were some in the past but I know that staff is also geared up and pressed forward with a path forward that is substantially toward unifying the city towards a better goal and that's coming with a new comprehensive plan eventually which if you look at the proposed map for that this is in coalescence with what they're looking for for the future land use again how many units can you fit on this um area so in I know based on the numbers I mean probably 40 but I don't think it's actually that many no it's not going to be 40 by any means uh there's a specific amount of open space if I'm not mistaken it's about 20% for this area it's either 15 or 20% but I think it's 20% so right there you're knocking 20% of the site off then you have to take into account actually providing uh retention which is about 17 to 18% of the area as well as some roadway interconnectivity some of the storm water will count for open space but there is a portion of it that won't so basically there's going to be storm water open space and right of way that are going to be taken out of this project before you see the Lots come to play and then the amount of actual lots that come out of that is just the linear amount of feet on that roadway so there's there's not projected to be too many I do have one of my Engineers here that could potentially there how many Lots on our most recent concept plan but realistically we do see that this is going to be much lower than 40 we don't know exactly how many until we get through further phase and more extensive engineering but at this point it's not going to hit the maximum so would you potentially have connectors into Delaware and Michigan Avenue and the existing neighborhood that's to the north we are working out our circulation patterns uh so I guess it would be feric Road would be to the north correct so feric directly to the north and there is a subdivision that is adjacent to it that they that we are trying to line up with for ease of transportation and so forth uh trans just Transportation circulation so forth but we are also looking to work with the city throughout the preliminary subdivision plan and subdivision construction plan processes to make sure we're making the alignments and the improvements that they're seeking to better the or to further their overall Transportation plan and we do know this is a very intensive Corridor so we want to maintain and make sure that we are keeping a watchful eye on any impacts we have for it okay any other questions for what's the uh what's the anticipated timeline to start construction um so I it depends on how long it takes us to go through the entire process I would say roughly 12 to 15 months is more of a hopeful timeline um but again we have the preliminary subdivision process then after that it' be construction plans then following that final plat and as of not I do not believe there's a concurrent review process so you're seeing those sequentially and a couple more will come back and for front of uh the city council for instance questions I got a question for City staff all right thank you thank you yes is feric Road there now from Michigan to Old retre I believe so yes it's not totally done right Mr Alex can you Mr alexand can you speak into the micone can feric road is it done from Michigan to Old Hickory Tree from what from what we understand H Melissa dunan uh director of Community Development from what I recall it's not improved yet okay that portion of ferdi but it is in the works right well if this zoning map amendment is approved and they move forward to their subdivision construction plan any adjacent right of way will have to be approved to City standards so that would include feric Delaware and um Michigan that the portions that are um contiguous to their property and is there still a plan in place for a I believe Orange Avenue is going to connect to Hickory Grove in that same area Orange Avenue is supposed to eventually connect South to Niti and um North to um 19th Street if I'm recalling correctly so would this subdivision have access to feric over to Orange I don't believe so because there's there's a an agreement in the works with the fct where they um have asked the city to not improve that area of um feric um and I don't know the details on there I don't know if Dave Tomac is uh here and available ailable but he's currently working with the ferx on um improving Orange Avenue in in Li of fct road for the portion that is adjacent to their property and the skylakes connect to Michigan I believe so Sky Lakes it's hard to see on this map it doesn't look like it do no it actually does not look like it it's hard to tell on the map if Sky lakes does or not but I believe it does okay any other questions if everything is good thank you any other comments this close everything and uh I ask from if anybody has a motion yes ma'am I'm so sorry and I forgot to mention just the point of clarification even though the land use is not changing and they can currently build up to four dwellers units per acre the current zoning only allows one acre lots so if you change the zoning you're reducing the lot size to a 65 ft width so I just wanted to make sure that was clarified thank you all the clarifications and everything said anybody have a motion um I would like to make a motion and to recommend approval of ordinance number uh based on the 16 findings within the Land Development code I have a first do I have a second I'll second I have a first and second all in favor I I all opposed no I two three okay who voted who who voted in favor of the motion by hands so vote of three to two in favor of approval recommend recommending approval three to two passes thank you very much now we'll be listening to ordinance number 20 24- 51 cda2 24-5 good evening Planning Commission Tisha Manning zoning manager for Community Development um the um project before you is the amendment to the Land Development code for many warehouse and storage facilities um currently that is um under our chapter 3 performance and sighting standards article 14 use res regulations and this is section 314.23 um so in that section um is currently right now the section is a through K so we are proposing to reorganize what is currently there as some additional language and so this slide kind of breaks down how it's going to break out with the new language that we're adding um so section a through C is going to be uses permissible and prohibited uses um section D is going to be the height standards e is maximum size of units um f is going to talk about the visibility of rollup doors from the public RightWay um prohibited uses of storage materials is G through M and then what's really going to be the bulk of the entire section that we're rewriting and amending is going to be the design of the building facades which is going to be H through k so in these slides I've outlined in those sections um the sections that we're adding I didn't really take um take into consideration the things that were already existing um in the ordinance and in the Land Development code as it stands so what we're adding to section A is going to be a secondary and a primary use and that's going to allow like if they want to build a two-story building and then they want to have some type of commercial or something at the bottom that able to do that um and we've done a little bit of research and it's not anything that's existing right now in this area but there are some storage facilities that have like restaurants at the bottoms that have drive-throughs so we added some of that language to allow that if that should come to verish here um we've also um added language about the accessory uses we can tell that a lot of the storage facilities have um accessory uses for the rental of trucks so we've added that language that they can have two trucks available for rent on display and the parking areas that are visible from public RightWay but those spaces utilized cannot be the spaces um that is required for their parking count um so when we go to section B it talks about the prohibited uses and what we've added there um is some things that's happening you know throughout the state of people using many warehouses as residential for residential purposes so we've made sure to add that language um that it cannot be used for residential purposes that they're not able to store any type of weapons Firearms or ammo um they cannot store illegal substances um not limited to drugs because people store all types of things um as well as drug paraphernalia and they're not um allowed to have any type of animals on property unless it's written consent by the um facility owner and the reason why we say written consent by Facility Owners if someone that goes in there with some type of impairment and they have an animal as their gu dog or things like that we want them to be able to take that animal on property but not be able to you know use the storage facility as like a boarding of animals and different things so we've also added some height standards in the mini warehouse and storage facilities Land Development code we are now requiring that um the minimum height is 24 ft which is approximately about two stories um and then the maximum height is adjacent to residential is 35 feet um and that's so that it doesn't go over the twostory of what a typical residential home may be um section g we added about curb cuts um because we want to make sure that we limit the amount of curb cuts that they can have coming into that facility to three for the entire parcel and two for any block face um just to make sure we have you know through access they give other access points if they build these type of facilities um we've also um added this section this section was already in the code but I did want to bring this out because um we want to make sure Warehouse doors are not the predominant feature of the building facade um and so what we've also added in section H to further elaborate on that is that interior access to unit shall not be visible from the street unless it's behind walls or Windows and that's with at least a three foot um behind the wall behind the window at least incest by three in in indented by 3T so um just to give a little bit more visual interest sometimes you see the two stories and you can see the doors behind them but they do have the windows in their back um we've also added a lot of um Design Elements when it comes to mini warehouses um and a lot of this code is something that we've already have in our non-residential architectural standards but we want to bring it over into the mini warehouse section because we want to make sure that we only bring over what applies to the mini warehouses and that it's very specific to the design of a mini warehouse or a storage facility so some of the things that we are bringing over and that's going to is the same as it is in non-residential architectural standards is the amount of designed elements per square feet so at 10,000 fet or less they have to have three design elements 10,000 square ft more than 10,000 square ft but less than 50,000 requires four and anything 50,000 ft or more will require five Design Elements and then if you look in the code there's very specific design elements that they can use things such as awnings um you know block facade so different things that they can use to accommodate those Design Elements um in J we also um again BR this over from the non-residential and it just talks some more about how the actual facade of building buildings um should look it talks about building materials um the prevention of monotony it talks about color pallet so that it's not anything that's not going to be um in character with the area in which the many facilities many Warehouse or storage facility is going um it talks about their appearance from rideways um as well as any office or retail building space that they might also allow on that property um we've also o included um Design Elements as it pertains to lighting to make sure that they have up lighting to make sure that they have photometrics um provide us photometric plans and they provide lighting throughout that facility itself so that there's no you know dark skies and we're making sure that the facility is safe for the people that are you know visiting that facility as well as anyone that may just be surrounding it um we also um do the elimination of any solid blank wall so again that's going to go back to those Design Elements where they have to add some type of banding they have to use a certain type of material they have to make it aesthetically pleasing and give some Vis V visual interest to the to the building um and we also talk about the transparency so any um of those buildings facades that faces a public right away has to have a maximum and a minimum number of transparency to look as if you can walk into the building even if the building is not open like if if it's just even a fake facade um so that you know as cars passing by again it's all about Aesthetics and then we also added this section um specifically in outside storage and that outside storage can only be located inside and rear yards and entirely screened from the view of adjacent non-industrial property and public rways um and it has to be screened by a 6-ft maery wall so staff has um reviewed this ordinance and we do recommend approval of ordinance 20 24- 51 and likewise we ask that the Planning Commission also recommend approval this is a city project so I'm available if you have any questions any questions yeah I have some questions uh what's the reasoning for the minimum 24t is that are you trying to encourage less of a footprint we're trying to yes we're trying to um get them to actual increase the intensity and build up versus out because out takes up more land use um they'll bring in some buildings and then they want to have you know a majority of just outside storage so it's taking up a lot of land space and creating Spar all and so we're trying to come away from that okay that's what I thought uh and then as far as the 6 foot uh fence for or concrete wall could that be taller if they I know typically in residential it's 6 feet is the limit in the city but I know that a lot of times those yards are used for storing things like boats and RVs and I'm just questioning if six feet is is high enough well um we put it at six feet because again we we're trying to anticipate what they may be storing so maybe it's just cars but you're correct if they bring in RVs or boats um then that is definitely something we can look at as going as far as maybe 8 ft um we don't want to go anything higher than that because in our commercial the highest is ft yeah yeah understood okay is there a maximum height Max got you got a maximum for residential for 35 but there is there a maximum period could they build a 10-story storage facility and and if they they're they're maxed at 35t 35 ft of residential area well then we would look at floor area ratio if they're building in commercial um we would look at the floor area ratio the maximum is really so that for the maximum of the 35 ft is if they're building adjacent to residential even if their floor area ratio allows them to build more we're giving them a maximum that they cannot because we don't want Tower and storage facilities over residential but if it's not in a residential area they can go to the sky no then it will be governed by their floor area ratio and any other zon issue okay m is there already something existing uh that requires the I know that you're allowing for two say U-Haul or whatever the brand may be trucks to be advertising in the front but is there any um requirement for the rest of those to be parked in the rear or on the side it is required um so it's not specifically written in the code that's why we're adding it um they can have them now on the property um um a lot of times they come with conditional uses before us and so at the point of conditional uses when we tell them they have to be parked in the rear they have to be parked somewhere else so by installing by you know writing that into this code it's just kind of real upfront and show them you can have two on display so when they're developing because remember this is for new development that they'll develop that area where they're going to store the remaining of those trucks yeah and I was only asking that because we had one conditional use that came before us and they were supposed to only Park two trucks and every time you drive by you see like six eight 10 trucks okay out front so that's what I was asking yeah yeah I don't know which one any other questions oh satisfied thank you ma'am we'll open up for public comments if there's any no public comments we Clos public comments any other questions amongst yourselves if not may I get a motion please I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number 2024-the I have a first do I have a second I'll second I have a first and second all in favor I I anybody opposed everybody has to vote I five 5 Z okay thank you thank you so now we have uh three would you like me to read them completely and then we'll do them separately correct okay so it'll be ordinance number 20 24- 52 an anx 23-5 and then ordinance number 20 24- 53 CPA 23- 00008 and ordinance number 202 24-54 zma 23- 00009 good evening Ralph Keith associate planner with Community Development the cases presented to you tonight is for annexation comprehensive plan Amendment and zoning map Amendment for a project known as Lal Avenue the property is made up of 88 acres and is located at 30 3150 lasa Avenue the applicant is requesting approval of ordinance 202 52 2024 53 and 202454 staff also recommends approval background this request meets both statutory requirements and is consistent with our joint planning agreement with Oola County as is contiguous and reason reasonably compact the existing County of future land use is low density residential and existing County zoning is in institutional the subject parcel is located north of Cypress Avenue and west of laau Avenue as you can see to the north and east is contiguously City boundaries background the proposed flu is parking open space the appc proposing a zoning of open spacing Recreation is compatible with the surrounding area and will have no adverse impacts on City facilities here are graphic representations of the future land use and zoning map depicting the County's low density residential land use and institutional zoning District honor honor before July 25th staff reviewed this project and recommends approval likewise is requested the plan commission Al also recommends approval of ordinance number 202 2452 2024 53 and 202454 for the annexation land use and zoning map amendments for the project as L out a at this time staff and the applicant are available for questions I have any questions for staff what's going to be built there it will be a telecommunication tower Tower any other questions does this does there have to be an established need for something like that to be built I'm just curious if you know yes yes there has to be an established need um because it the city's goal is to improve the infrastructure in the area and that's how we will stick to the comprehensive plan is it a Communications tower for the city yes wait no oh I'm sorry one moment I assume probably a cell phone tower or something yeah it's a cell phone tower yeah yes currently the applicant is proposing a cell phone tower in that area and so it is supported by the open space and the um and park for the zoning so so is there going to be a park there along with the Tower or we just calling it a park space because there's a tower on it that's just the zoning that um a tower is able to go into that type of Zone it doesn't mean that they're going to have Miss Manning Miss Manning could grab the mic so doesn't mean they're building a park that's the zoning that they're requesting and it allows for a communication Tower why does the property owner want to Annex into the city because they're contiguous and they any type of development with our joint planning agreement requires that they Annex into the city remind me don't we have I I seem to recall that we voted on some standards for Towers cor there certain requirements I don't remember if it was height but there visually how they appear right yes yeah yes and we bought on on placement where they were going to be mhm yeah height was part of it visually how they appear I can't remember the actual specifics of it but it it is requirements of how the tower has to look right right okay any other questions I mean I don't have any issues with this I think it sounds like theoretically if they build this Tower it would improve um service for people in area needs it uh so I think that's important um I mean obviously I think that would have to go for another approval right if they actually were decided they wanted to build the Tower or or would would the just simply the changing the zoning suffice no they would have to go through a site development plan right right okay so I assume if anybody in that area was opposed to it that would be their chance to you know voice their opposition city council yeah sorry Melissa dunan community development director um this item will also go to city council with your Rec recommendation so that is also a public hearing where anyone can come out and and give their their comments now do they have to send um was there a notice sent out to Residents within um I think it's 500 feet of the area yes we just now notice to 500 ft okay just checking okay thank you thank you is the applicant available if you'd like to say anything good evening Mary solic 121 South Orange Avenue Suite 1500 Orlando Florida I'm Council for the applicant um your staff's already done a very thorough evaluation of the applications and answered a lot of your questions is there anything else I can add to the mix I don't have any other questions no okay thank you I'll sit down I think there's a young lady back here that wants to say something to you so I'll come back I will close it up for uh and now we'll get public comments would you when you're done please fill out the small form and give it to the secretary please when you're done speaking okay state your name and address please bring down the mic my name is Bonnie Dixon ma'am if you could just move the mic bring down the mic there we go there you go my name is Bonnie Dixon and I live at 3,000 LEL and that's a very North End of L I have 20 acres in the middle of everything and there's only one road that comes in there and out of there and they can build whatever they want to there as long as it don't block my road I built that road going in and out of there uh as long as it don't block my road with me coming in and out I don't care would you like to address that absolutely Miss Dixon I am happy to report to you that unlike the first item on the agenda we do not generate any traffic we get one vehicle trip per month per carrier on the tower once the tower is built and um the construction is very minimal and we we will not be blocking your access okay well that's fine good to you thank you very much because there is only one way in and out of there and that's it so that's that's good then if there wasn't roosters in big trouble Tommy yeah ma'am ma'am do you have any further comments any other comments okay thank you so much have a okay any other public comments while we're here okay we'll be closing for public comments any questions or comments amongst yourselves I think it's a good idea it's been far needed in that area okay can I get a motion please we're going to remember Mr chair we're going to take these items uh one at a time can I get a motion for ordinance number 2024 I mean yeah 202 24- 52 anx 23- 00005 um I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number [Music] 2024-25 a second I'll second go ahead we got a first and second all in favor I I I I all oppos no passes 4 One Mr Alexander voted against next one will be uh ordinance number 20 24- 53 CPA 23- 000000008 will I have a motion please I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number 20124 d53 based on the 16 findings within the Land Development code I have a first we have a second I will second it all in favor I I I all opposed no passes for one Mr Alexander against okay I had a time limit yep you ran out of time you ran out of time for next we'll be hearing ordinance number 202 24-54 zma 23- 00009 can I get a motion please I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number 20 24-54 based on the 16 findings within the Land Development code I have a first do I have a second I'll second I have a first and second all in favor I I all opposed no passes 4 One okay next reading will be ordinance number 20 24-55 cda2 24- z007 good evening Planning Commission Tia man is z and manager for the city of St Cloud um we are going to um postpone this um reading of this LDC ordinance 202 24-55 to a date certain um and move this to the September Planning Commission okay okay thank you thank you so much um secretary can you please tell me the date of the September Planning Commission op I I think it shows to be uh September 17th yes so it's going to be moved to the September 17th Planning Commission thank you ma'am thank you so at this time then we'll be hearing n ordinance number 202 24- 56 zma 24- 005 good evening Ralph Keith associate planner with Community Development the case before you is for a zon map Amendment for a project known as Nova Road subdivision is made up of 3038 Acres it's east of Shaker Palm's place and west of Nova Road the applicant is requesting approval of ordinance number 20 2456 and staff also recommends approval the existing zoning designation is R1 single family the proposed zoning will be r1b single family dwelling the development is comp compatible with the with the surrounding area and will have no adverse impacts on City facilities here's a graphic graphic representation of the future land use and Zoning Maps depicting the low density residential future land use in existing R1 zoning District honored before July 25th staff reviewed this project and recommends approval likewise is requested that the plan commission all also recommends approval of ordinance number 20 2456 for the zoning map Amendment known as over Road subdivision at this time staff and staff and the applicant are available for questions I have a question for the applicant is this uh just an extension of the Westerly that's there or is it uh John Adams RJ wh Associates 8 Broadway CMI Florida 34741 are referring to the neighborhood to the West yes it's a separate neighbor uh separate neighborhood separate development however it would be requesting the same exact zoning with similar there isn't because that existing development didn't create a stub out uh we're still in the middle of uh planning our concept plans I know Center Lake Ranch is a mixed use District to the north that we will show a connection to across the street there is a high school uh being built that'll open July 26 and that'll have uh some bearing on where we can connect to Nova road but we are coordinating with the school board's design of the high school across the street as well okay but you would have a stub out to the north to North yes to to create that internet connectivity with the mixed use District excellent thank you any other questions for the appli go ahead I think my question probably be more for the city just kind of for the understanding um are these both low density uh categories the difference between our R1 and R r1b yes thank you uh yes they are both low density categories by doing r1b it will allow for additional units okay but still it still count as low density yes okay any other questions thank you sir you're welcome I'll open up for public comments no public comments you do okay have you filled the form after you spish speaking you can fill the form give it to the Secretary State your name and address hi and speak into the mic my name is IET Cruz um I live in 5740 Shaker pound place behind the the that's my patio and um my my question is that is that's going to be a road connected or going to be um houses what because they explain exactly this is my house right here and they just put this line they don't say nothing about houses it's only a road a road connection man ma'am if I could for the commission they they'll take your feedback and I'm sure the respond may want to respond to your question but the commission's here to take your feedback but they're not here to answer the questions for you that might be something suitable for the applicant for you okay thank you so much can I'm sorry can you just clarify your question yes it's going to be a road it's going to be houses what well can you show the applicant and maybe he'll have an answer for you okay thank you so much thank you the applicant's right there any public comment any other public comment well we got it open we'll close public comments any comments amongst ourselves or questions you want me to address that yes you can once again John Adams RJ Wht Associates uh clarify this is just a zoning application uh after this there will be a preliminary subdivision application that does show all those details of what will be there uh it'll likely be a house or water Pond that abuts that uh adjacent neighborhood that's already existing there but again that's another application that will come in front of this board and city council thank you very much can we look at the map again um I just want to see something okay I just I wanted to clarify what home we were talking about because there was an existing home on the property but that that's part of the the property that we're talking about so I just wanted to check and make sure any other questions amongst ourselves if not all public comments are closed all comments are closed May I have a motion please I would like to make a motion to recommend the approval of ordinance number 2024 56 based on the 16 findings within the Land Development code I have a first we have a second I'll second have a first and second all in favor I I all opposed pass is 5 Z okay thank you sir next thing we'll be listening to is ordinance number 20 24-1 124r CNU 24- 0000001 good evening commissioner Stephanie streer associate planner for Community Development I do want to go on record and amend the agenda it should be a resolution not an ordinance um but tonight I'll be presenting CNU 24-1 jjcc Assembly of God Church conditional use it's on 1.69 acres of land located at 1406 Eastern Avenue the applicant is requesting approval of resolution 2024 124r and staff is recommending approval with conditions so for background it is residential 2 R2 zoning which is what requires it to be a conditional use places of worship is a use that has to be approved conditionally the future land use is medium density residential they are proposing on the bottom parcel a 5,395 ft building where their church WIll reside they currently exist on the top parcel in the 15,000 square foot building which is where they have their church and their educational facility they will have Sunday services at 900 and 10:30 and Tuesday and Wednesday services at 700 p.m. for some background the church currently exists at 324 seats they're actually reducing their seats to 284 they did have their conditional use approved in 2017 which mached them at 32 24 seats and 120 students so that existing building will remain as their educational facility with the max at 120 students and they will be lowering their seats for the new 5,000 foot building the classes will continue Monday through Fridays 8:50 to 250 so these are the graphic depictions of the zoning in the future land use map you could see to the north on the zoning they do have commercial above them and to the east of them and then they're surrounded by the residential too I did provide you updated concept plans that were not provided in your staff report the staff report was a little large and it was harder to see where the 5,000 ft facility was located so the applicant provided us an updated concept plan where you can see that 5,000 ft facility with the parking they will continue to also utilize the parking on that 15,000 square foot side um if you're able to see that in your staff report so they will have parking in both locations still because it coincides with the school so staff is recommending approval of resolution 20241 124r with the following conditions the main Auditorium of the expanded Church shall not have more than 2 184 seats the existing School shall not have more than 120 students the approval of the requested conditional use does not constitute the approval of the provided concept plan changes to the site will require approval of site development and any additional approvals required by the LDC and for as long as the use permitted here under continues in the event that stacking or standing of vehicles encroaches into the public rideway or otherwise interferes with the flow of vehicular traffic as determined by the city the resolution may be brought back before the city council for review and consideration of additional conditions to address traffic issues or possible revocation of the rights granted here under in perpetuity so we are requesting approval of resolution 124 with the conditions as stated by staff staff is available as well as the applicant for any questions thank you very much questions no I don't have anything if I could Mr chairman just a reminder to the commission the uh the report of the the conditional use the factors to be considered are on pages three through six of your report the six factors that you're consider whether to give approval or to withhold such so just pointing that out out for you it's on pages three through six of the report thank you per the Land Development code up St Cloud we have any questions for the city no with the app could like to speak while you're here good evening Planning Commission my name is Bruce Taylor of B Taylor and Associates and I'm here to answer any further questions that you may have thank you so much so the existing building is between um 14th and 15th Street that's correct and then so the new facility would be between 15th and 16th right correct it's just south of 15th Street 5395 there's a there's actually an existing parking lot there which we're going to remove some of the space we're going to keep some of the other spaces that's how we came up with the with the maximum seating of 284 so that's why we're actually reducing some of the seating in the new church who goes to the parking then it's any questions thank you I don't have any other questions any questions for I have a question um it says here under number two I guess it's page four that um the church is going to encourage your participants to utilize alternative means of transportation that's correct we I I believe a lot of the um the people that go to the church live around that area so they're going to be they're going to be able to be a pedestrian walk to the church that's from my understand thank you more for like the neighborhood you should also add some bike racks just in case got plenty of them on there they look if you look at the new plan I think I have about 20 on there yeah I think I I see them in the top left corner now yeah it's a very nice facility proposed any worship place is good for me any other questions for the applicant thank you sir for your time thank you I'll will open up for public comments if any no public comments we close public comments any other questions among El or to the staff if I have no questions may I get a motion I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of resolution number 2024 d124 are uh based on the six factual matters within the Land Development code I'll second uh first and second all in favor I I I I passes passes 5 Z yes sir if I may if I just want to confirm we're including the conditions also as yeah we didn't you didn't include that in your motion the conditions I'm sorry say that again the conditions that were recommended by staff to for the approval does does your motion include those conditions uh yes sorry so yes including the conditions recommended by staff I got first have the second the conditions okay all in favor with the conditions i i i passes with the condition thanks for clarifying thank you Stephanie Madam Secretary our next meeting please September 1 September 17th if there's nothing else can I get a motion to end the meeting I'll make a motion to adjourn uh first second I have a second all in favor I we're adjourned thank you thank y'all I don't make