Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. Welcome to the February 10th City of Apakka Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. If you all stand with me for a moment of silent play prayer and a pledge to the flag.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. During tonight's meeting, each item on the agenda will have a time set aside for members of the public or affected parties to speak on that matter. If anyone has any matters that are not on the agenda tonight that is planning and zoning related and wishes to speak, now would be the time to be recognized. Seeing none, we'll move on. Item number one, meeting minutes from January 13, 2026. Do we have any changes to the minutes, additions, subtractions?

If not, then we need a motion. So moved. Motion by Commissioner Washington. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Mott. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Item number one, ordinance number 3118, Land Development Code, Text Amendment, Town Center Overlay District, Wild Oaks. Owners, Kelly Park, DB Development LLC. Applicants: Lounge, Drossdick, Doster, Caner, and Reed, PA. Kerata Teddro. location southwest corner of Kelly Park Road and State Road 429. Miss Sanchez.

Good evening. Jean Sanchez with the Community Development Department. This is a request to recommend approval of a land development code text amendment establishing the Wild Oaks Town Center Overlay District. The ordinance and this ordinance and the proceeding ordinance number 3150 on tonight's agenda represent the culmination of more than two years of coordinated work between the applicant, city staff, and consultants to align the land development code as well as a comprehensive plan future land use amendment. Together, they create a coordinator regulatory frame framework governing where and how a town center overlay district may be applied and and implemented. As part of this process, a joint workshop with planning commission and city council was last held on January 22nd, 2025, outlining the proposed town center overlay district and associated code updates. This graphic illustrates a conceptual block and street and streets framework required by the town center overlay district. Performance standards for adoption of the overlay includes a minimum project area of 170 acres. Inclusion of all five KPI character zones of village center employment interchange transition neighborhood and inclusion of at least one quadrant of a designated village center character zone. Blocks must be configured to support a highly connected street network with a maximum block perimeter of 2,000 ft except where physical constraints exist. While the plan is conceptual, all future development must be substantially consistent with the regulating framework. This slide highlights the open space performance standards required by the overlay where a minimum of 20% open space is required across the entire entire overlay district.

Open space must function as a connected network of parks, plazas, greens, trails, and enhanced storm water amenities wherein the standards require that all residents be within a a quarter of a mile walk of at least one public open space area. An open space bonus allows residential density to increase from 27.5 to 30 dwelling units per acre if a minimum of 30% open space is provided. The street plan demonstrates circulation and mobility standards required under the overlay. Streets must form an interconnected multimodal network incorporating complete streets principles for pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and vehicles. Internal streets may be public or private but must follow I'm sorry. Internal streets must be p public or private but must follow the town center street standards and mu kpi street design criteria. An applicant is required to submit a town center master plan including phasing regulating plans signage parking and design guidelines to ensure coordinated implementation. The town center overlay district includes clear enforcable performance standards that includes a minimum F or floor area ratio of 0.1 maximum 27.5 dwelling units per acre of density with a bonus up to 30 dwelling units per acre. Maximum building height of 10 stories with required transitions down to three stories along Golden Gem Road and adjacent single family areas and required town center master plan, master parking plan, as well as a master signage plan. The DRC, the development review committee, reviewed the amendment and recommends approval based on the findings of fact and evidence in the staff report. And at this time, staff

will turn the presentation over to the applicant for an over overview of the proposal. Actually, we'll go ahead and do that after the um ordinance number 3150, which is the proceeding item. Um both the city's consultant and applicant are available to address technical questions as well as the applicant themselves. Very well. Thank you, Miss Sanchez. And we have questions of staff. I got a question, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Dei, just want to make sure, Miss Sanchez, as I heard it correct, with 20% open space, you can have 27.5 dwelling units, and with 30% open space, you can go up to 30 dwelling units per acre. That's correct. Yeah.

Which one are they planning on doing? Do we know? Um, I would defer that to the applicant. I don't know all the users quite yet or if they have any in line already. Uh, so I'm not sure what density they're going. That's a missed opportunity to go to 35% open space, but okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Commissioner Wood, excuse me. I saw where Walmart just purchased some land in that area. How close is that to this development? That is just north of Effie. It's uh So, it's across the street essentially from it. It's I'm sorry. It's across Kelly Park Road.

It's on the other side of Kelly Park. Correct. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? I have a question. Uh, Miss Sanchez, as I was reading through the document, um, there was, um, some comment about the town overlay district as long as it was a specific size in acreage.

Correct. in that KPI, are there currently any other locations that have that amount of acreage that there potentially because if I understood correctly and what we're looking to approve tonight to then move on to the city, you know, commission um for their um review and and approval or or um alteration is that if we approve this town center concept. As long as another location had the same amount of acreage, they could then utilize the same

they would be eligible for the town center of correct. It would function just like a village center except this has um size standards. Um this has to include all five other districts within. But yes, those are the performance standards. Is there any other acreage of that size currently? Not to say that it couldn't be combined at some point in the future, but is there any other that is currently that size

vacant? I don't know off the top of my head. I did recently we we Bobby and I looked up some parcels earlier this week for another um unrelated issue, but I don't think there's much left in the KPI that you could um kind of uh amalgamate all these parcels. 170 that's pretty large for the KPI. Yeah. So, um I I don't think so. You'd be pretty hardressed to find that. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Right. question. Commissioner Washington,

just to be clear, the 27.7 dwelling units um then you have with a bonus of up to 30 if they come up with a 30% open space is provided. Uh so are are we talking about 27.5 adding another two and a half units to get to 30? Yes, sir. Is that what that means? So then it's it's a a building with many floors. It just means that the building be one floor more

higher. Yes, that that could possibly be it. Um but keep in mind that the KPI allows for uh taller buildings um compared to other parts of the city. Um for this one in particular, they can go up to 10 stories. Thank you. Very well. This is the applicant here at the presentation.

Good evening. Tara Tedro Loungaw 2 and five North Yola Drive, Orlando, Florida. Just as a quick overview, we have two items that are on the agenda tonight. My colleague Jim Constantine is going to do a presentation that really talks about both because the comp plan amendment and the LDC proposals tie together. So to make it efficient, I understand those are two votes that you'll have to take separate, but we wanted to talk about those under one presentation if that was okay with the commission. Thank you. And and just as a reminder, you're probably having a little bit of deja vu as to why we're back to talk about something that we've actually already gone through hearings before you and city council on. So, as Gan had mentioned, uh, back in January 22nd of 2025, we did have that joint workshop where we went over all of these details, and this is two years of planning efforts between ourselves, the city staff, and the city's outside consultant, Alex Stringfellow, to come up with what we believe to be the best master planned community that we can have meeting the spirit and the intent of the Kelly Park interchange form-based code and the existing mixeduse policies of the comprehensive plan. So, we've added some refinements and tweaks to a large property, 170 acres. We can't think of another one that is going to meet these standards short of assembling a bunch of different land owners who've already developed together, which I can't see the point or how that would happen, which is why we needed a little bit of a unique touch to the project that we have and why we came up with this uh land development code modification with the assistance of your staff. We did already go on 51325 in front of you all for the comp plan amendment. It was then a first reading on January uh or I'm sorry, July the 2nd of 2025. And at that time, our comp plan amendment was part of the city's overall comp plan amendment that was being proposed to the state. When that got transmitted, Florida Commerce sent a letter back to the city in September of 25 saying, "We have some issues with the comprehensive plan under a bill called SB80, which basically said cities can't

do anything more restrictive or burdensome in regards to regulations. Pretty broad sweeping piece of legislation that's had some very negative ripple effects in some areas for development and and for the city, it's held up your comp plan amendment getting processed for quite some time. So, the city is processing an overall comprehensive plan amendment, but because the state pointed out issues with the city's comp plan that had nothing to do with our town center overlay policies, we talked to staff and they said, "You might as well just pull yours out instead of going in with our overall package and run this as a standalone agenda item." That's why we're back before you again. That's why it's the same thing that has come before that was approved at planning commission approved for transmitt to the state and the state again had no comments. We anticipate that that would be the same process when we go back for a transmitt um as well after city council. But just wanted to give you the refresher as to why we're here and kind of doing things again that we have already done and already had approved. It really is just a glitch that we got stuck in for the last better part of nine months um from dealing with some issues with the with some state legislation. Uh but other than that, I'm happy to answer any questions after I have my uh colleague give a presentation. Thank you very much.

Good evening. I'm Jim Constantine. I'm a principal planning with LRK Architects and Planners. And is there a just advanced one here? Let's see. We go. Keep going. There we go. I think as already has been uh stated that the town center overlay district is really a pair of text amendments. One for the comp plan for the future land use element and the other in terms of the land development code for really advancing the vision uh that's in the KPI. And that vision, the city's vision is really to create a special place, the the sort of places that our firm has dug in and helped design and implement uh for decades at Celebration in Bowwin Park. And we also study and analyze uh in historic places like Winter Park where those special mixed juice places have stood the test of time. And uh we've really tried to draw on our experience to try to uh inform what's proposed this evening. Um the major policies of the future land use element remain unchanged. In fact, they will be advanced by what's uh proposed. There's really just a series of what staff's memo called clarifying and modernizing um some provisions in the code. But the future land use element remains as is and will be advanced because what we're promoting here are ways to better achieve mixed use development. your goal both vertically integrated, horizontally mixed and on adjacent parcels. The flu policies call for mixed use areas uh to achieve a really a high range of highquality design, innovative planning and environmental goals. Uh and this

will be reinforcing those existing policies is focused on the MUKPI which is outlined in red and the wild oaks area within it which is the largest developable tract outlined in blue and shaded red located zooming in the primary target area for this mixeduse development is really within the uh interchange area 429 and Kelly Park Road uh where the city has targeted did this as the place for the most intense, dense, mixed use placemaking and economic growth. Uh where Wild Oaks is again the largest and most strategically uh located parcel in blue. The city's planning efforts guide and concentrate this development at two uh intersections flanking the interchange. The one at the left where Wild Oaks is is uh Kelly Park and Golden Gem. Um, we're right at that at that key location and we have the most extensive frontage on Kelly Park Road. So again, this large developable parcel gives us a chance to bring to uh realization the city's vision. It's also worth noting that a lot of the other development out in the MU KPI has been single use at lower density and intensity, not quite meeting what the city's put forward as its full vision. So, we really see this as kind of the the chance to really do it right. So, from this point forward, I'm going to uh reorient the plans. So, West Kelly Park Road is now at the left. Uh everything in color here is part of the Wild Oaks assemblage. Um and you can see that we have uh frontage on on all of the streets there, Golden Gem, West Kelly Park, Effie, and Sadler. Um, and we also span the five character districts that are shown, the interchange, village center, transition, neighborhood, and employment. And you

may recall about two years ago when our team first came into a joint meeting of PNZ with the city commission, we identified a multitude of challenges that exist in the existing MUKPI code. Um, some of these include that uh open space is calculated separately in each of these character districts. In some districts it's 10% and some it's 15 and some it's 20. We're raising that bar to 20% minimum requirement across the entire new town center overlay district. So we're increasing that amount of open space uh as a aggregate. Um the uses are also categorized separately in each of these character districts which then creates some challenges with mixing uses density and intensity that gets restricted across uh district boundaries. Um, so there's sort of arbitrary lines that create uh artificial boundaries within what really should be uh the mixeduse district that the city envisions in the comp plan. So the city asked us to work with staff and your planning consultant who's here this evening to work together to figure out a solution. The town center overlay district is the result. Again, it's consistent with and advances all of the major future land use policies. In fact, as stated in the staff report, this amendment is a regulatory framework that supports a true sound town center environment while providing the flexibility for required largescale master plan development at a location identified in the comp plan as the primary location for mixeduse growth. So the key uh key requirements uh for applicability be a minimum 170 acres. we have to have all five character zones in here. Uh and in addition to the area that you see outlined in red, there's one we show one potential future expansion which was the original Madison Oaks parcel u uh for for multif family which could be added in in the future. There's also the ability to expand this

district elsewhere uh if we um further increase the the tracted area. The overlay district will replace some of the current KPI code provisions with more functional, flexible, and detailed requirements. So, there'll be greater specificity requiring a regulating plan that specifies where the pattern of streets, blocks, and open spaces. That's included actually in the code. Um there's other new requirements that call for the master develop developer to provide for uh development and design standards and master parking and signage plans. Uh all of these are um uh really replacing the current standards with things that will be more specific uh in implementing. And other new requirements um include a regulatory framework that um in our experience from decades of working on mixeduse master plan communities will be more effective in implementing and that's really what's critical that as users want to come there's a way that they can fit in and plug in and we don't hit some of the roadblocks and challenges inherent in the current code. Um so some of the community benefits big picture increased parks and open space designed as an integrated network uh including counting things that right now under the code like the green space that you see on the screen here uh which is coming in from West Kelly Park Road. That park which is kind of a central identity and gateway into the community doesn't count as a park under the current code but would count with these changes. And so it's really trying to make sure that the code is flexible and allows for um the best possible uh development. Uh and again there would be an increase in open space across the entire uh community. Um uh there's also tremendous

opportunities for non-residential um economic development here. uh shown in pink at the right is already approved million square feet of flex uh and industrial space and in left you see in red areas along West Cully Park Road where we've identified opportunities for uh incoming um commercial medical retail um uh service uses that are really awaiting these code changes so they can be best accommodated and that we can deliver uh the economic development that the city envisions. and has targeted here. And then lastly, um it's really allowing for more innovative development with creative design by making sure that the vision that the city has actually can be more uh easily realized as development takes place. So that really concludes the um presentation that we have for you.

Thank you, sir. Does anyone have questions after? I do. Uh thank you, Commissioner Washington. Thank you, sir. Thank you for that presentation. It's very

um Advent Health Hospital. At one point it was uh on the east side of 429 in Kelly Park. Now I understand it's over by the town center. Is that true or not? Good evening, Joe Benonati. I'm with Wild Oaks and I just want to go back to the section that's to the norththeast, which is right under the 429. That's where Advent's going to be putting this advanced emergency room. and they have decided not to do that on the 6acre property that they own near Publix.

Okay. So, the the new location is in one of those red areas. Yes. Yes.

Yes. And then the the next phase of the advent relationship is for them to put medical offices on the main street on the second and third floors. So these buildings that have been drawn are now advancing to a more detailed stage and we are trying to get that next phase of the advent relationship going which requires us to get this um code amendment going as well. So that's where we would see it into 28 maybe a bunch of doctors and nurses, administrators, patients that would be coming here and then a bunch of inline retail on the ground floor which we have a list as long as our arm on small retailers that want to come but we just need to get some of the big pieces sorted out first. this road that's on on the screen and you see the nice park there. Uh it says Wild Oaks. Is that FE Lane?

It is not. I'll um see if I could. This is does not have a pointer or it does have a pointer. It does.

Maybe I can do it with the with the mouse. Ah, okay. So, that main street is right here. Okay. So, FE and Sadler are currently built. So all of the there are almost two miles of roads and tens of millions of dollars of infrastructure, portable water, waste water, electricity, um technology that's already been built and exists underneath the ground right now. Any other question?

Yes, sir. Ryan, it looks like you're looks like you're relying heavily on parallel parking. Are you planning on building any parking garage? We do. You do parking garage? Okay. Because the u parallel parking I think is going to be very difficult to have ADA compliant um parking for people with disabilities. No, sir.

Wider, you know, they have to be wider and they have to have an access aisle. I was at a a wonderful event at Lake Nona this past Saturday. Um it was an outdoor um concert and the design of those structured parking lots with everything painted white with terrific light and the ability to, you know, not be in a dark corner was something that definitely stood out for me. I was with my wife and she was just saying if you know I were designing as a woman a structured parking garage, this is the one that makes me feel safest. So yeah, that's definitely to come.

How many how many parking garages do you think you'll need?

It will ultimately depend on what types of users decide to go where. And to get into that point in a little bit more detail, obviously we're, you know, we're involved in a project that was going to keep us around here probably the next couple of decades. So, the parking plans of today may adjust as self-driving vehicles come. And we are thinking as much about pickup lanes and drop off lanes um for ride sharing as we are thinking about structured parking. That's a good idea. Thank you.

You're welcome. Anyone else? A question. Mr. Um, you made mention the 20% open space over the five overlay districts. Help help me understand that. Is that 20% of the five total or is it because you mentioned there was like 10% in one, 15% in another, and 10% in another. Can you explain that a little bit more so I can grasp the is it the total and you could literally have an overlay district that had 40% open space and then one that only had 5%. Is that a possibility? I'm I'm going to let Jim respond to that.

Yes, it would be it would be 20% over the entirety. Basically everything that you see on the screen here is in the town center overlay district.

Okay. So 20% and we already from our concept planning we're we're definitely going to uh exceed that. So the open space is great for our community and it's great for the public and we know that was one of the city's goals was to try to increase that. So right now within the village center core there's only a 10% requirement where in um the neighborhood district um I believe it's 20 and it's 15 and others. So we just raised the bar and took the minimum up or took the maximum today under the KPI and made that the minimum for the entirety but also expanded the range of open spaces. There's very strict requirements in terms of um some of the things that qualify as open space and we really tried to open that whole bundle up. So uh even dog parks that don't qualify today and trails and things of that nature would all qualify as open space. So, it's really a way and it's going to be designed as a network.

Thank you. You're welcome. Any more questions? I have just Commissioner Norwood um at the beginning of your presentation you mentioned celebration in Baldwin Park which I know utilize septed principles in their designs. Will this also be utilizing septed principles crime prevention through environmental design? Yes. Because uh really in terms of having a streetfront relationships, eyes on the street safety, active sidewalks, uh a lot of visibility, um it would naturally be that. Yes. And also slowm moving streets with slowmoving traffic control devices and such. Yes.

You want to you want to have pedestrians out because that's one of the best ways to make a place feel safe is for to feel active as a people place. Anyone else? Very well. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Is anyone here from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for discussion. Oh, I'm sorry. Didn't see you, sir. Please give us your name and address for the record.

My name is T Sorry. My name is Tyler Burch. Um I'm an attorney with JC Wilson and Associates and our address is 601 North Fern Creek Avenue, Orlando, Florida. Um here to speak. Um we're representing Kelly Park Self Storage LLC. Um and uh just have a witness we'd like to have chat for a minute. Um I'm just going to seed to her and uh just talk about it real quick. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. I'm Kathy Hathaway with Pre-development Advisors 473 Devon Place, Lake Mary, Florida, representing Kelly Park Storage LLC, which is a small property owner um flanked now um basically on three sides um by the new proposed town center overlay district. Um we have two concerns with the ordinances before you tonight. Um, and I'll just briefly share those concerns. The first is that it is inconsistent with several of your comprehensive plan policies governing the Kelly Park interchange area. And also, it significantly benefits one developer within the Kelly Park interchange area to the detriment of all the other developers and property owners within that area. Specifically, the two comprehensive plan policies that it is inconsistent with um are policy 20.10 and 2030. Those two policies speak to the fact

that the highest levels of intensity and density and the tallest buildings in the Kelly Park interchange area should span the area north and south of Kelly Park Road, east and west of State Road 49, in between Golden Gem and the Golden Gem intersection with Kelly Park Road to the west and the Plymouth Sarrento intersection to the east. What this these ordinances do is they create a new overlay district in the southwest quadrant of that area that has the highest density of any land in the city. The highest intensity of any land in the city. the highest building height by right of any area. So the development standards that were to be spanning a broader area are now isolated in one specific property. Is my time up? Um secondly, with regard to how it benefits one particular developer, um I think there were several questions early on in this public hearing relating to the criteria for this overlay district. Um it's without question if you read each and every one of them, no other property in the city um can qualify for this overlay district. um it does benefit uh one specific developer um and it eliminates the level

playing field and the Kelly Park regulating plan. Um the other property owners are bound by the regulations of their particular district. They know they have to follow the rules for their district as do every as does every other property owner within that same district. that's no longer the case. Um, now there's a new and unique set of dis of regulations that ex far exceed the rights of the others and benefit only one um developer. So with that, we would ask that you not you recommend not recommend approval um to the city council for these ordinances. And I do appreciate your time and attention this evening. Thank you. anyone else from the public speak.

Yeah. Um, back in 2019, I believe 2018 2019, and I know some of you were on this board at that time, the medtech overlay was approved within the formbbased code area. And that basically does allow um property off of u FE drive north of FE drive to be reserved for a hospital use and it reserves it I believe it says in the code between 40 and 100 acres. Uh so that's where the impetus for the town center overlay that's being requ proposed tonight came from was from that idea and that's been in on the books the medtech for seven years now. Well, thank you. Uh, Miss Cedro, would you like to respond?

Just briefly in response to what you heard, Bobby did bring up that the medtech was created again to recognize that some of the properties that are within the KPI have unique features that the code simply was not written, taking into consideration may exist in the future. So the way that the code was written never considered that there could be a 170 acre master planned community. So while a lot of the other developments are one-off, they might be 1 acre to 10 acres to 15 acres, you don't see any other properties that are trying to work around these lines in the sand that were creating some artificial barriers to us being able to do a successful mixeduse project. Your staff, like you've heard, spent two years working on this with us to try to come up with policies that worked around some of those issues while still meeting the intent of both the form-based code as well as the comprehensive plan. The policies that were questioned are ones that would be modified so there would not be inconsistencies. You've also heard your staff render the professional opinion that there are no inconsistencies and in fact what we're proposing is consistent with your comprehensive plan and the intent and goals behind the KPI. You also heard a question about the highest building height. Um just to be clear, the property that she represents is in the interchange district and the interchange district allows per code today to go up to 10 stories. So that property too could also go to 10 stories under the way the code is written. Uh no different than what we are proposing. So it it's not creating some sort of outofscale development around that site. They would have that opportunity as well already to go to 10 stories if they desired. And in my opinion, this does nothing more than raise the property values of all the the sites around us. This type of code and the development that we're contemplating in the tens of millions of dollars of infrastructure that have already been put in to create some market ready pad sites for commercial developers is exactly what the city has been trying to unlock for over a decade in this area.

And we've spent a lot of money hoping to get us to where we are today so that we can bring those users online and really create a vibrant mixeduse community that takes into consideration a lot of what the folks have been asking for, not just residents, but the city planners, the intent of the code originally. And I think you see you have a developer who has a very genuine and authentic desire to bring the best product to this city and is going to be around for for quite some time uh trying to make this the absolute best master plan community that the city of Apopka can have and we hope it's going to be a big regional attractor for people to want to come here, spend time, spend money uh and hopefully live. So we appreciate the opportunity to come back and respond to the comments that you heard and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

All right. Does anyone have any questions? Thank you, Mito. Thank you. Very well. We'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to start with the discussion. So, Commissioner D,

we're we're the city government. We're the ones that are supposed to set the guard rails for how development is going to happen in this city. And I understand this has been undergoing for 20 years. This this whole process started I believe back in 2004 with the Kelly Park interchange. But whenever I sit there and I I heard three or four times now that this is 170 acre project, if we're not going to start with the big fish, how can we expect the small fish to to to uh comply as well? And and I appreciate the developers, you know, they spent millions of dollars. And I mean, this is actually a pretty nice project. And I appreciate the fact that they increase the open space from 10 to 20%. But I'm very, very disappointed in our elected officials in this city and our city officials for not pushing that to be higher. Why couldn't we push them to 35%. We the thing is we can't we're and go back to the developer who spent millions of dollars to develop this and say, "Oh yeah, now you're you guys are going to be good guys and give up millions of dollars in revenue for open space. It's not going to generate any revenue." I wouldn't expect that. But I'm disappointed in ourselves as a city for not asking them to do that at the beginning of the process. That's my point. So given that, I'm against this.

Okay. I understand your point. I don't know that you can hold the applicant accountable for the actions of the city, but that's you're allowed that. Anyone else?

Mr. Mr. chairman. Um, I recall a couple of these meetings some time ago and I walked away from those meetings with the very distinct impression that what was being proposed is what we see tonight. now where all the exact uh rules, the codes, everything done in place because if I'm not mistaken, one of the presentations made mention that our current code in the city of Apakka wouldn't allow certain things. And if that weren't looked at and reviewed and changed, then a development like this wouldn't even be able to be started from the, you know, get-go. Um, you know, recently there's been a lot of conversation about um urban sprawl um and and and um the cost to um put the infrastructure in for the urban sprawl, etc. this development is going to compact, you know, an urban sprawl, even though it's 170 acres and could expand a bit, the amount of population that will be in this um is I think it's the first for a popka certainly and we already know that um at this moment there's not another 170 acre um piece of property that would be able to use this same type of development, but um this has been discussed for a long time and to get to tonight and I appreciate the the comments that was made, but to get to tonight and this be the first time that I've heard of u you know opposition to that type of

thing. Um I'm wondering where was this opposition long ago during the planning phase. So that just my comments. Thank you, sir. Anyone else? Very well. We need a motion.

Chairman, I I do have a recommendation. Um if I may, uh this is an LDC text amendment and it's it's numbered as ordinance number 3118. The comprehensive plan amendment uh that uh goes hand in hand with this is numbered 3150. And speaking with staff, of course, it's my understanding that the reason that uh the land development code tax amendment is numbered a lower number than the comprehensive plan amendment is. As you know, uh just some changes uh as far as the city's comprehensive plan and sending everything forth for uh that this is being broken off from from the city's efforts. Uh and so right now we're hearing the the LDC text amendment prior to the comprehensive plan. What I would recommend is before making a motion on this particular item is hearing uh ordinance number 3150. Even though it comes before or the number is after 3118, it still essentially precedes the tax amendment because it will become effective first. And if there are changes to the comprehensive plan, and there are that address in that ordinance that affect this uh particular ordinance with with the uh the code change, it makes sense to hear that first since that is contingent upon the the uh the comprehensive plan amendment and to vote on that first.

Very well. All right, we're going to table the motion for item number one for the time being and then move to item number two. Ordinance number 3150. Comprehensive plan future land use text amendment wild oaks owners Kelly Park VB Development LLC applicants Lounge Dstic Dostster Caner and Reed Car Tara El Tedro location southwest corner of Kelly Park Road and State Road 429. Miss Sanchez

for the record Jean Sanchez with the community development department. This is a request to recommend approval of uh the comprehensive plan text amendment to the future land use element for the Wild Oaks property. Subject property is located at the southwest corner of Kelly Park Road and State Road 429 and consists of um approximately 304 acres. This amendment is a policy level companion to ordinance number 3118 as you heard which amends the land development code. The purpose of 3150 is to update and modernize the future land use element and formally recognize the town center overlay district within the mixeduse Kelly Park interchange area. The amendment revises goals, objectives, policies, and tables to support large-scale master plan mixeduse town center at the Kelly Park interchange. The amendment does not change the future land use map but and doesn't affect properties outside of the KPI area. Instead, it establishes clear policy direction for low density intensity open space and multimodal connect connectivity that are addressed at the comprehensive plan level. Staff is highlighting four key future land use element policies and table updates in your staff report. Uh it's policy 20.5, table 20.10 10 uh table 20 and I'm sorry and policy 20.20 um the policies are intended to function together as a cohesive policy framework supporting the town center overlay district. Uh the amendment is closely aligned with the course with a comprehensive plan advancing policies that discourage urban sprawl, concentrate density and intensity at major transportation node and promotes walkability, mixed use

development supported by the transit and open space. The future land use element in continues to preserve all existing Wakiva study area protections including environmental safeguards, density limitations outside of the KPI and resource protection policies. So there's no policy that is um limiting those or changing those. The policy direction reflected in the future land use amendments were previously discussed at the joint workshop meeting prior to these formal hearings. And so therefore the development review committee recommends approval of the proposed amendment. The recommended motion of course is to recommend approval of this comprehensive plan text amendment as well as approval of the transmitt to Florida Commerce. Thank you, Miss Sanchez. I don't know if there's anything else to go over from the applicant. Does anyone have questions of staff?

Anyone have questions of the applicant? Very well, sir. Anyone?

Oh, can I can I make a comment? This is Joe Ben audio of Wild Oaks. Can I make a comment about the open space? Obviously, there's a lot of master planning still going on. The design is fluid and we can't command the market as to what they'll do. So, we have to work hand and glove. But we are not only um we're not stopping at 30. We have the potential to get above 30 and whether we get if we have an opportunity to get to 31, 32, 33, we have every intention of of taking it and that would be inclusive of our our parks or any water features, anything that folks can can actually enjoy while they're at Wild Oaks. That's our goal. And we, you know, I think you all have heard me say this a dozen times over the years. You know, our aspiration is for people to come home on a Sunday evening, work at Wild Oaks all week, go to the gym, go to the restaurants, jog around on the paths, and not really use their car for seven days. And part of trying to achieve that goal is with as much open space as possible that's not just a big field but also things that people can enjoy. So I just wanted to address it. It is at the top of our list not at the bottom of our list.

Thank you sir. You're welcome. Does anyone from the public here wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion. Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind, I would like to make a comment to the uh the previous.

So my ask would be that you guys make every effort to make as much open space as reasonably possible with your financial makes financial sense. I appreciate your comment about that and I will support this and I'll change my vote to yes, but I'm asking do you guys make every reasonable accommodation to make the maximum amount of green space possible, open space. That's my ask. You have my word on that. All right, we need a motion. I have a question. Should the motion be for Commissioner Norwood? Should the motion be for 3118 and 315 together or should we

No, two separate motions, but we want to have this one on the record first and then we'll go back and and do the the motion. Okay. So, we need a motion on 3150. Mr. Chairman, I'd make the motion to recommend approval of ordinance number 3150 amending the future land used element of the comprehensive plan in transmitt to um Florida Commerce. Thank you, sir. Motion by Commissioner Mont. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Dwey. All in favor say I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

All right, we're going to revert back to I'm going to go ahead and read it through. Ordinance number 3118, Land Development Code, Text Amendment, Town Center Overlay District, Wild Oaks. Need to get a motion on that, please. Mr. Chairman, um before you make that motion, I just want to make sure we have um correct we have something on record that states we are correcting the ordinance for 3118 to include that the effective date to be after the um approval of 3150. Wouldn't it be we just didn't approve the other

it it would be based um on the adoption of 3150. That's the effective date of 3118. Okay. Okay. Do we need to read something different in the motion? I don't believe so, sir. It's It's an internal staff correction. Well, if you need a different date, we have to come back tomorrow and read. I'm sorry. Okay. Second Tuesday of next week.

I'm so sad I missed your joke. I'm sorry. I can help with a motion if it if if there's a motion that ultimately if somebody makes a motion to go forward, I can help couch the motion simply because the consistency finding with the comprehensive plan would be contingent upon uh approval of of 3150. And um in addition to that uh I would include in the motion subject to the changes that staff described that this particular amendment becomes effective after 3150 becomes effective if adopted. So we need to read that motion. Yes sir. That's what I would recommend.

Yeah I'll take the challenge Mr. Chairman. Why not? So given our previous discussion and the ask and the response, I'll make the motion to find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and compatible with the character of the surrounding area. Recommend the approval of the proposed land development code text amendment based on the findings and fact and the evidence presented in the staff reports and exhibits. Given that this will take effect after uh adoption of motion 3150, ordinance 3150 that was previously very well vot. Thank you, sir. Motion by Commissioner Doom. Do I have a second? Second it. Second by Commissioner Ryan. All in favor say I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. All right. Item number three. Oh, special exemption 355 South Hawthorne Avenue. Owners Michael R. Cooper Construction, Inc. Applicant Michael R. Cooper. Location 335 South Hawthorne Avenue. Do we uh this is quasi judicial? So I have to ask, has anyone here had expart communication on this matter? No.

Very well. Mr. Hanza. Good evening everyone. My name is Amir Hamza. I'm a planner. Uh the applicant has submitted a uh special exception request to allow a list of uh uses on the site located at 335 South Hawthorne Avenue. And uh right here is the the uses that are being requested for the special exception uh permit. And uh these are the following uses are permitted the through a special exception in the mixeduse downtown zoning district which is the current zoning uh of the property. The applicant is requesting the the listed uses under a special exception permit as they want to sell the property but be able to also market the property at a higher value with these allowed uses under the special exception permit. These are the vicinity and aerial maps of the property. The total area of the property is 2.42 acres. The 335 South Hawthorne site is currently vacant but has an approved site plan under the name Hawthorne Business Center. The property has a future land use of commercial currently and has a zoning of mixeduse downtown as shown on these maps. Here's a list of special exception review standards the applicant must comply to according to a land development code. Uh here is the approved site plan of the 335 South Hawthorne Avenue site under Hawthorne Business Center. The development committee recommends approval of a special exception to allow the listed uses. The recommended motion for planning commission is to approve a special exception to allow the listed uses. Staff and applicant are available for further comments or questions.

Thank you, Mr. Tom. Anybody have questions of staff? Commissioner Wood, why are we allow or being requested to allow I I see casinos aren't in here. So, let me go back to the list of uses.

It It's such a broad speech. Um my concern is somebody goes in and develops a property for one thing and then they're open to change it to anything they want. Uh my understanding of a special exception is for a specific thing that is normally not in that area but is comparable to what is there already. So I'm just totally confused on why there's such a broad special exception being asked. Again, as I mentioned before that these uses that that are listed on here are permitted under a special exception in the mixeduse uh downtown zoning district under that permit. And uh again, they want to have these uses so they could market the property for someone to buy. And uh when someone uses there are multiple uses on the special exception permit currently but when let's say a developer or someone were to buy the property and they use one of the special except the one of the allowed uses under the special exception permit within two years that special ex the other uses would expire and that use would only be there. So that and end of the day it would be there uh someone would pick one out of all these uh uses. They wouldn't have all of these uses in one building.

All right. Anyone else? Commissioner M. The the um Mr. Hams the drawing that you had up on the screen that's just a um that's not what's going to be there is that it currently is approved the site plan was already approved under uh uh the DRC so this has already been uh signed by every department and uh currently the site plan is uh uh right now it's not not going to expire until April of this year so it's still permitted So, it appears that there's two buildings, correct? Correct.

Two physical buildings. Correct. And what we're trying to determine, those two buildings would go up and then if we gave the special uh exemption, any one of these things could go in one of those two buildings. Is that what I'm That would be correct. But there are certain uses on the special exception permit on here on the uses on here where um some of them are are industrial uses as well, not just commercial. So they would have to most likely do a future land use amendment. So it really depends what the like the special exception permit is there for the for all these uses. But if someone wants to do like an industrial use in this list of uses they would have to do a future land use change. Okay. All right. Thank you.

Anyone else? Very well. Does anyone have the applicant have presentation? Yeah. if you have any presentation any comments.

Mike Cooper, Cooper Construction. Um, as far as what we want to do, so you understand on the special exceptions is that we want to give the property additional uh exceptions and we want it to blend in with the neighborhood. As of right now, if we go with the the permissible uses they for gardens and vape shops and uh restaurants and things like that, they don't blend into the neighborhood. This neighborhood has south and construction just like I gave you guys some some information on it. It's got storage areas. It's got uh a large uh communication tower. Uh the area across the street. And I'm not saying anything bad about I'm just saying it it just doesn't blend in to retail spaces. And that's what a lot of the permissible spaces actually indicate and that they would like to have some type of a retail space in there. And it just doesn't it just doesn't work in the area. So that's the main reason we ask for the special special acceptance because it does allow us to go with some other areas. Uh, also, uh, those that do know me, I do have a pretty nice building and we're not going to put anything in there that's not going to enhance the entire area. And that's what we really like to do is we want to try to clean up any area that is a little bit rough and all the way down from Okoya Paka Road all the way up to uh, the railroad tracks on u Bradshaw. I've developed all those 55 buildings and we've really cleaned up the area and there's no reason that we can't help this area out and that's our main goal is to try to help the city and do the best we can do to do what we can to enhance the city and especially the

downtown youth. We had a popka, a Christian academy in there and to be honest with you, I I worked with them for almost a year and a half. That's why the very little has been done on the property. And I suggested to them that having no actual real true parking when you have a school, you have additional a lot of parking that's required. That's all there is to it. and there wasn't enough parking uh that I felt would enhance and take care of the area. So, I suggested to them that they own 37 acres down on uh 441. I suggested to them that they turn around and let's build down there. Let's not try to do this. And another problem they had was future use. There's no future use. is two a little less than two and a half acres and parking is a problem. If you have schools and things like that, any type of a school, a church, which that is all under permissible uses, it it just doesn't work because there's just not enough parking. And we've went across the street to Quest to see if they want to sell us that property so we could help the this Popka Christian Academy help them. And they didn't want to sell. They didn't want to do anything. and across the street. We tried to buy that and they're not willing to sell. But 500 ft away, we're putting in a a nice building and on the last page of the the brochure that I got you that'll show you the the rendering and we're almost done with the building and it's going to be quite a a very very nice building and the landscaping is good. Everything and it it helps the neighborhood. Again, the neighborhood down there is on Fourth Street is uh I'm not going to say depressed, but it it it's just not the it's anyway, you know, I think you got the point. So, that's the the main

emphasis to go with a special exception because gives us a little more uh avenues, a few more avenues to actually get uh good areas and good uh tone and owners, tenants or whatever in there. Thank you, sir. I have questions of the hour. Very well. Thank you, Mr. Cooper. So, anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for a motion.

Mr. Chairman, I got a lot of motion. Just looking at this property, I I know some people that have dealt with Mr. Cooper and also been been down there many times to see his buildings and it's a quality product and we appreciate I know you've been a good partner with the city even though I will remind you kind of in a funny way that uh I called you a couple years ago to ask you a question and you hung up on me tell me you didn't want to get politics. I appreciate that though. So given given that anyways I uh I'll be happy to create the motion if anybody doesn't have any other. So, I'd like to make a motion to approve a special exception to allow the list of uses in the MUD mixeduse downtown zoning district subject to the exhibits and findings of the staff report.

Thank you, sir. Motion by Commissioner Doomy. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Wood. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. All right, that means you have to not hang up on him now, Mr. Cooper.

All right, on to site plans. Item number one, residences at Emerson Park major development plan construction site plan revision. Owners, Park Square Enterprises LLC. Owners Park Square Enterprise LLC applicants George Gregory PE care of Vanessa Hangden Brussland Inc. parcel identification location east of Koapka Road west of Alston Bay Boulevard and south of Harmon Road East. Miss Sanchez.

Uh before we get started, um I'd like to introduce myself a list. Um I'm a resident of Emerson Park and a former board member and they have litigation um which I'm fairly knowledgeable about. So I would like to recuse myself. Very well. Um would we have him step out until this item is over with and then call him back? No, there's no need to have uh him step out. I mean, if he wishes to step down just to show that he's not participating, that's that's fine. Okay. All right. Miss Sanchez.

For the record, Jean Sanchez with the community development department. This is a request uh to approve or to recommend approval of the major development plan and construction site plan revision for the residences at Emerson Park. a previously approved 103 unit town home community. The development was originally approved by city council in 2020 and all subdivision infrastructure has since been constructed and accepted by the city with a certificate of acceptance issued on February 6, 2025. So vertical construction of the town homes have been underway. The project is located east of Akoi Popka Road, west of Alston Bay Boulevard and south of Harmon Road East within the Emerson Park development area and it is over 14 acres in size. Surrounding land uses are primarily mixed use and residential including the existing Emerson Park residential subdivision to the north and the east as well as the Greystone Apopka Health and Rehabilitation Center to the south. No changes are proposed to external access points surrounding roadways or adjacent properties. As part of this request, all access, circulation, and emergency connectivity remain as previously approved. The subject property has a future land use designation of mixeduse and zoned mues or mixeduse gateway. The proposed revisions do not change the approved density or intensity which remains at at 103 residential units or approximately 7.2 dwelling units per acre. Staff has reviewed the proposal for consistency with comprehensive plan and land development code once again and finds that the revised layout remains compliant with all applicable zoning and development standards. The applicant is requesting a limited

revision to the previously approved major development major development plan and construction site plan. Specifically, the proposal uh replaces 12 twocar garage town home buildings with an updated onecar garage product uh specifically on lots 1 through 18, 49 through 60, and 67 through 99. and the formal designation of open space track OS-8. These provisions are confined to building footprints, internal lot grading, sidewalks, and driveway geometry. Importantly, no changes are proposed to the the completed infrastructure. Parking continues to be provided through a combination of garage spaces, driveways, and on street parking. Under the land development code, the project requires a minimum of 170 off- streetet parking spaces. Uh the revised plans provides 476 spaces. Pedestrian circulation, internal street alignments and emergency access as I change as I said before has is unchanged and remains compliant with the LDC. Required buffers are provided with canopy trees like live oak and southern magnolia supported by understory and accent accent trees including crepe myrtle and lali pines um along with shrubs and fencing where it's required. Foundation landscaping is provided along all town home buildings with shrubs and ornamental trees. The proposed revisions do not include the reduction of landscaping buffer widths or open space and open space track OS-8 is fully landscaped and integrated into the site design. The DRC recommends approval. Um therefore um the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the major development plan construction site plan revision for the residences at Emerson Park.

Okay. And and for clarification, this this was already this plan was it has been 2020 and the only changes is just the town homes are going from the two car to single car. Yes, sir. That's the only change to the whole plan. Very well. Okay. Just want to clarify that that and the um designation of uh open space track OS-8. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Any questions of staff? Yes. Commissioner Washington, just building on your question. So the Do the elevations of the homes change? No. We haven't received new elevations. Um I I'd have to defer that to the applicant when they come up here to answer.

All right. Um anyone else have questions? Staff Commissioner M. Where would we discuss the letter that's been sent to Mr. How now or later? The letter pertaining to this issue. Yes, it was in the Well, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on. It was in the packet. This what we're talking about right now may come up later. Well, that's why I'm just saying is it now or later? Okay.

Um, can you clarify that? It's fine to address the letter, but my advice is to proceed as normal unless there's a court order uh that requires that uh you do not do so um by viewing the letter and then taking aside making a decision based on what the content of the letter is. Uh the planning commission would be taking aside in the litigation and that's that's something that doesn't involve the city. So it's something that planning commission should not do. So we just considered information in the packet and no more. Okay. Very well. Yes, sir. Commissioner Ryan.

So you're going from the town from two car garage to one car garage for parking street. Well, they were already over LDC required parking spaces to begin with. So they put more cars in the street. Well, I'll defer your question over to the applicant. Um, I did put a calculation in there.

I don't think we have a list of the bedrooms.

Mr. Ryan, the code bases parking on the number of it's basically so many spaces per unit. So it doesn't take into account bedrooms, it's per unit. So I believe single family home is two. Yeah, we consider per unit as Bobby said as well as it considers point I think it's 0.5 per visitor that it anticipates. And the stat report states that the revised MDP CSP provides 476 parking spaces. And how many I believe how many units are

with a twocar garage or with a onecar garage? That's inclusive of the one car garage. Yes. Yeah, there's 100. So they're not they're not converting the entire town home 103 unit to to onecar garages. It's only for certain amount of units. I think it's about 50% they're converting um into one car garage. So, it's 476 spaces for 103 units. Um but I'm sure the applicant would be happy to go further when it's right. You want to hold that question.

Okay. Okay. All right. Very well. Thank you, Miss Sanchez. Hi, good evening. My name is Joseph Koves. I'm an attorney with the Lounge Law Firm, 215 North Drive, Orlando, Florida. Uh I'm here with Mr. George Georgie, who's chomping at the bit. He's our engineer to answer some of these questions. Uh before he comes up, I do want to say that we agree with the staff recommendation. Um we are available to answer any additional questions you have. Um, and I just want to understand for my own benefit, did I hear you say you're not um going to consider the information in that letter in making your decision?

No, not not that we would not consider it, but not to be an item of discussion any more than a person from the public speaks. It's a piece of information in the packet for our edification, but I don't think that it's it's a subject matter we'd bring up here and put one side of the put one side out there without the whole board here. And as our attorney says, it's not necessary to discuss it. Understood. Um to the extent it does come up later or the board has any questions, I'm happy to provide the applicants um stance on the letter. With that, I will let Mr. Uh George, you come up and answer I think some of the questions you had about the site plan.

Good evening. George on the UR 225 East Robinson Street uh in Orlando uh the civil engineer on the job. So um to to answer your question in regards to the parking. So um as Gina mentioned, we're not changing all of the all of the uh the town home buildings. It's about half of those are being changed uh from having two u two town hall uh two garage units to a single garage unit. Uh as far as parking is concerned, the code requires for for for the entire development about 170 parking spaces. We're providing over 470. So as parking is concerned, uh there there should not be any issues there. It should be u plenty plenty of spaces as far as in the driveway on street parking and and the garages. Um so that's that's as far as parking um building elevations. I think there was uh a question about that. Uh the rear elevations, we added uh another elevation uh depiction on on the plan showing uh having having the single car garage versus the two. Uh it's consistent with the with the development in general uh with the with the remaining elevation just the elimination of the additional uh you know the smaller detached garage.

How how many total units are there? Um of so it's a 103 unit 103 total units in the whole complex not what you're asking to revise that's the total yes okay so uh I I asked a question about the elevation 4.56 the um I was just curious yeah so you're going from twocar garage to one car garage so something has to change somewhere are you increasing the living space to you know that you're you know if you're giving up space for a garage are you going to create more living space?

So the these are detached garage that the space is not getting uh added to the uh um to to the to the square footage of the building. It's becoming uh just an open space um next next to the the single car. Uh yes. Okay. Never mind. Okay.

All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you. I do have the total number of units that are going to be reduced. Uh how many how many two garages are going to one car? I have to get back on the exact number. I believe we had 103 total units and it was around 60 60 units that were changing. Um that will be changed that will be changed. Yep. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone here from the public that wishes to speak on this matter?

Your name and address for the record, please. Good evening, Mr. Howell, members of the staff, chairman, and committee. My name is Jennifer Haye. I am the president of Emerson Park HOA, and I'm speaking on behalf of them. First, I'd like to thank you for your time and for the city's continued responsiveness to our community. We value our partnership with the city and appreciate the opportunity to share information before decisions are made on the revised plan submitted by Park Square for the residences at Emerson Park. Our request tonight is straightforward and measured. We respectfully ask the city to defer or not approve at this time. the revised plans currently under review until pending litigation regarding a wall and property boundary issue is resolved. This is not an attempt to delay development. It's about ensuring that any approvals the city grants are based on accurate verified site conditions and not on assumptions. There is currently an active litigation concerning a wall retaining structure that the Emerson Park Homeowners Association contends was constructed approximately 6 feet onto our property, including underground foundations. This work occurred without authorization, our authorization. In our lawsuit, we are asking the court to require removal of the wall, restoration of the property, and compensation for damages. While we understand the wall previously went through the city approval processes, we believe that approval may have been relied on incorrect or incomplete boundary information. Despite public record requests, we have not been able to identify and determine exactly what surveys or ownership documentation supported that approval. To clarify, we are seeking further

records through formal legal channels so the facts are fully understood. In addition to the boundary issue, an independent arborist, the same professional used by the city of Abopka confirmed that construction along this wall cut into significant old growth tree roots, 17 of them. The opinion of that is that these impacts may ultimately kill the trees along that corridor. that affects not only just aesthetics, but safety, long-term maintenance, and property values within our neighborhood. Here's where it directly intersects with the plans before you tonight. If the court determines that the wall must be removed or relocated, that relocation could affect setbacks, building footprints, grading, drainage, access, landscaping, and the service road that's adjacent to this wall. Even if the current revisions appear unrelated, a court-ordered change could force substantial redesign and repering of exactly the elements now under review. Approving plans now creates three practical risks. First, approvals could be based on disputed boundary assumptions. Second, the applicant may have to return or provide additional major revisions. And third, the city and staff could end up duplicating review work costing time and public resources. Deferring action until litigation is resolved is simply assures that the future approvals are durable, accurate, and not subject to rework. Separately, there is an ongoing litigation regarding cost sharing for roadway improvements along Alustin Bay Boulevard. I mention this only to provide context that these disputes reflect broader unresolved development obligations that affect the community. I'm almost done. The association did not pursue litigation lightly. We spent more than a year attempting resolution

through meetings and mediation before taking legal action. So tonight, we respectfully ask the city to do three things. Defer deny approval of the revised plans until the wall or boundary issues are resolved. Require updated surveys and verified boundary documentation before future approvals. and include our concerns in the official record so decision makers have complete information. We remain committed to working collaboratively with the city and the applicant to find practical solutions for all parties. Our goal is simply to ensure that development proceeds correct lawfully and with full transparency. Thank you. Do you have any questions? Thank you.

Thank you. I have a question. Is the city talk name as a defendant in a lawsuit. Hold up. Hold up. Let me let me clarify something. Please correct me if I'm wrong. A litigation has absolutely nothing to do with what we have in front of us and us discussing a litigation between the city and another person will be completely out of it does not include the city just the applicant up for discussion this evening.

Was that an improper question to ask the deceased involved? Uh it's it's it's fine again um letters so forth and unless there's a court order requiring that you take that into consideration u ultimately what planning commission is responsible for doing is taking into consideration the evidence and so forth and reviewing the criteria. So unless there's a court order that requires that uh the planning commission take into consideration uh evidence regarding any type of litigation um it's something that you should not rely on. Correct. I just think that this is just between two private parties and and my opinion the city's not involved. But am I correct?

Unless there's a court order that has action in the city must take it and I have not heard that then uh that's great. Okay. Thank you ma'am. Mhm. And again, I I would say that a litigation between other parties for us to take that in consideration would be out of line. This actually would be leverage to one side or the other and it doesn't have anything any bearing on what the issue is. Are we going to approve the adjustment to this pre-approved plan? I agree with that. Okay. All right. Anyone else from the public wish to speak on this matter? Very well.

Yes sir.

Uh if I may just briefly um respecting your comments on the status of the the pending lawsuits just for the record of this body, the owner and applicant deny any wrongdoing in the ongoing lawsuits. The owner applicant is seeking approval um I suppose subject to the risk of the lawsuits and there is a a a procedure in litigation to get an injunction uh on an emergency basis. the standard is extremely high uh until those uh the lawsuits are finished and that has not happened here. So we would respectfully request this board proceed regardless of the um the fact that lawsuits were filed. There is no finding of wrongdo fault yet and the lawsuits themselves have nothing to do with whether there's a onecar garage or a two.

I understand, sir. I I think I clarified that is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand for us. Understood. Thank you. Thank you. All righty. Bring it back to the board for a motion. need a motion one way or the other.

Okay, I'll I'll I'll stab at this one here. So, when we look at the facts of this situation, it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. It is consistent with the land development code, and I think we have to go forward with this approving it. So, I'll make the motion to find the proposed residences of Emerson Park major development plan construction site plan revision consistent with the comprehensive plan land development code and recommend approval of the major development plan construction site plan revision based on the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Thank you, sir. Motion by Commissioner Dumi. Do I have a second? Second,

Commissioner Ryan. Thank you, sir. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Mr. Chairman, I'm gonna abstain from voting on this. Okay, one abstension. Motion carries.

All righty. Get Mr. Woods back. Oh, there he is. He's still here. And just for the record, in the event of an abstension, just do need to cite the reason for the abstension. Well, I think it does meet the um plan and that type of thing. I think there is potential liability because apparently after one year, no one can produce surveyed site plans according to this uh individual and I would think after one year somebody should be able to create you know have some surveyed site plans. So, I I think there's I think there's potential liability and this liability would not um exclude the city of Apopka from not being named in in a suit because they were the ones that approved the plan.

So, but if that's the case, isn't the city council the responsible party for that? Not that's completely irrelevant to what we have in front of us. We're not litigating a case and we're not I'm not I'm not I'm not saying I'm litigating the case. I'm just saying I'm abstaining from that vote and he wanted to know the reason and I just gave it. Very well. All right. Item number two, Cold Linkka Major Development Plan owners MG88 Central Florida Cold Storage. Applicants Joshua Hat. location 2560 West Orange Blossom Trail. Mr. Hamza,

for record, Amir Hamza, planner. The applicant has submitted a major development plan for property located at 2560 West Orange Blossom Trail, which is just east of Stewart Avenue and west of Lake View Drive. The major development plan is called Cold Link Apopka, which consists of a proposed new warehouse building on the existing site. The building has a the new building has a total area of 147,624 uh square ft. These are the vicinity and aerial maps of the 2560 West Orange Blossom Trail site. The total site area is 27.63 acres. The feature land use of the site is uh industrial and the zoning of this site is light industrial. This is the Coal Link Apka major development plan. There's um the existing warehouse there and then they're going to add an add additional building. As I mentioned before, the development review committee has recommended approval. Recommended motion is to recommend approval of the cold link uh Apopka major development plan. Staff and applicant are very for comments and questions.

Thank you, sir. Anyone have questions of staff? Yes, I do. Commissioner Ryan. No, my question to you is the irony is that I drove by this the other day and I wondered because we did approved something with this plan was what a year maybe two years ago and what was what was that and where what's the status of that? Um, so I know that we did like a cuz there was a two properties right there that were in the that were in the um county. So they needed to be annexed into the city first and then then we also put in a future land use and zoning to match the existing property. So now they're coming in with the plan to develop alongside.

Okay, fair enough. Thank you. All right, commission. Lake Drive. Which road? Yeah. Go back right here.

Yeah. Oh, no. That's an un unimproved rideway. There. It's just um there's unimproved rider, but there's no road on there. So, the road will be the access will be from Lake View Drive. I believe that was a platted county right away back on the original plat of the town of Plymouth back in like the 1800s. It's a paper ride ofway, so it's not an existing piece of rideway, so you wouldn't even know it's there if you went out in the field and saw it. Okay. I can see it here on the Yeah, they labeled it because it shows up on the survey. That's why is it Are they going to use that unimproved road?

Not to my knowledge. No, it's unimproved. It's an unimproved ride. Right. Right. But yeah, people still use unimproved road. Right. You can't You don't even know it's there. That's what I'm saying. It looks like it's literally a piece of property, right? Yeah. Are they going to use that road? I would ask the applicant that question. I would defer to the applicant. Okay. Hang on, sir. One second. Does anyone else have questions of staff? Well, on his point about the Commissioner Washington

Mayflower Avenue in the document that we're reading, it says access to the site is proposed to from Mayflower Avenue to the south of the site. Mayflower Avenue right away will be improved to city standards. So yeah, it was undeveloped, but it says here that someone is going to improve the road for use. That would be the developer who's going to improve the Mayflower Avenue to city standards. They discussed that last time there in front of us. Yeah, the Mayflower Avenue will be

used. Yeah, that was when we had the property to the east that was going to be developed as the um floor and decor tile store. Remember the discussion about Mayflower improvements came up at that point in time. The applicant is uh committing to improve Mayflower on this property. Right. Anyone else? Very well. Applicant here.

Yes, sir. Good evening everyone. Carlos Lopez representing the ownership for CO logistics. Uh just to answer your question, sir, no, we're not going to use that road and we are going to improve Mayflower Road. And uh we also have here uh Kimberly Horner, civil engineer, as well as Timman Construction, which is our contractor is going to build the building if you gentlemen and ma'am have any questions. Do do you own do you own that unapproved road? Excuse me. Do you do you own that unapproved road? Who own who owns that property? Commissioner Ryan, I just looked at the property appraisers database. That right ofway was vacated a couple of years ago. So half went to one property owner and half went to the other. Okay. Okay.

Yeah. It's all trees there now. Couldn't even see that little road there. Okay. anyone else? So, I remember when this came up before and um I had some comments and concerns about the flow of traffic. Yes. That that is there. So, if you have design people, that type of thing, is this going to be a right in left out on Mayflower even after it's improved? Mhm. And um will it have a turning radius that will accommodate large semi-truckss?

So we did do a traffic study, sir. I believe the question is your answer is yes, but I would you know let Kim speak more detail to that.

Manny Rodriguez, Kimley Horn, uh professional engineer 9458. um that that uh intersection will remain as a full axis um and would will be designed to accommodate uh turning radius for for vehicles. Okay, that's good because I travel this often. And currently there are those 53 foot trailers that come out and do a left turn onto Lake View. And Lake View many, many times is backed up to the intersection at Lake View and and Vigny. and the truck making that turn has to turn into oncoming traffic just to make the turn. So, it's it's a it's I think it needs to be a right in right out only so that they can at least go to the light or go to the four-way stop, then go all the way to the end of Binyan where it then connects back to 441 where there is a light. There is a light there at Lake View, but that little tiny, you know, 441 in Lake View that that is in my opinion an extreme safety hazard for fire, ambulance, anything like that. There would be no way to get through there.

Yep. So, we are part of traffic study as you may be familiar, we do traffic counts during the AM and PM peak hours, 7 to 9, 4 to 6. That's the when people are the traffic is at its highest right call coming going to work and going home. Um we analyze that intersection as well as the signal and that was based on the methodology as agreed up with uh with staff and uh the volume exiting on from from uh from Mayflower is is not substantial right this addition of this development is going to generate 18 peak drifts in the peak hour. Uh, so imagine for a full hour it's they're only going to see eight 18 trips coming in and out total. So that's like one every 3.3 minutes. So not not substantial. Um, typically these type of generators uh would be considered dimminimous um because they don't have uh a substantial impact on the adjacent uh stream traffic. Um but we are aware of the kind of current uh backing up. It's just the number of trucks exiting um at that Mayflower is not going to be high. So, they might be waiting for a little bit to get a to get a gap. Um right, but they're they will be able to make that movement because there's just not a a lot of trucks exiting. Just only like 18 during the peak hour. So, very minimal truck traffic. Now,

now that light at Lake View and 441, Mr. How if I understand correctly that is the responsibility of the state of Florida? I think so. Isn't that correct? Is that a sign? Yes. Yeah. Is it are you going to try and get that rettimed uh during your peak?

Yep. So those are part of our recommendations. Typically when we see stuff like that, we would coordinate with DOT and tell them, hey, based on our study, we think we need to change the timings a little bit. Um that's a very super easy thing to do um and to go out there and have to make those changes. Uh I do want to add that as part of this traffic study, we did recommend uh to extend that left turn um on US 441 coming down on Lake View Drive. So that's one of the improvements that we are going to do because we identified that that turning was a little bit small and we needed to accommodate the trucks and we want to make sure they do that effectively. Um, but yes,

I I think it would certainly help if it was the timing of that light was, you know, to accommodate your heavy traffic. So, thank y

why what harm would it cause you to not be able to make a left turn? Sorry. Sorry. What? a new property. Why would it be harmful to you to have a right turn only? Uh that would it's kind of hard to answer, sir. It's more of the truck drivers that service and pick up from our building that would decide depending on which way they're going. I I couldn't really answer that to be what would be harmful or not for them. Well, they would be going to 441 anyhow. Excuse me. They would be going out to OBT anyhow.

Yes, sir. So, going out off of Vignyant, which has a it's already built for trucks coming in and out where um Lakewood is basically built for cars and it's not that long of a street.

Hey, how y'all doing? We're going to throw the whole team at you. Logan Opsalt Lounge Law Firm, 215 North Yola Drive. The reason I'm up here is because um familiar with the property, the area, you've seen me here before on uh this property and unrelated properties. Excuse me. I think you all are on the right track. All of this area, you know, has has had some trouble. There's been a lot of coordination with FDOT, with the county. I think we've understood for some years now why why the city's looking at this intersection as well. uh even though it's a countymaintained road talking about Lake View. Uh we've talked about Mayflower in the past too. It's, you know, old right away. Believe the city took ownership of it at one point. Notwithstanding, um, much coordination is going on and a lot of this precipitated from the TIA and identifying those areas that need work. And you talk about the median in particular, Commissioner Woods, there is another cross street across from there. Uh, putting in a median there, but given the proposed width and what the county not just is willing to but not do, is part of that consideration. But in looking at the intersection, uh the improvement to the turn lane that our TIA uh has has identified, all of those holistically are looking to relieve the traffic that quite frankly you live through every day. Um so those things should be a net improvement. Um but I want to answer your question directly.

Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Anyone here from the public wishes to speak on this matter?

Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we for recommended approval of the cold link aka major development plan. Thank you, ma'am. Motion by Commissioner Norwood. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Washington. All in favor say I. I.

Let me recognize you. So the name because I said you started talking.