Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. Welcome to the August 12th, 2025 city of Apaka Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. If you would all please stand with me for the pledge and a moment of silent prayer. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. First item is approval of the meeting minutes from May 13, 2025. Anyone have any changes or deletions? Motion by Commissioner Washington. Do I have a second? Second by Commissioner Wood. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Number two, meeting minutes from June 10th, 2025. Does anyone have any additions or changes or deletions? Again, I make a motion to accept motion by Commissioner Washington. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? Second by Commissioner Wood. Thank you, sir. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. During tonight's meeting, each agenda item will have a time for members of the public to speak upon that individual item. That will be called during that the reading. If anyone has anything planning and zoning related that is not on the agenda tonight and wishes to speak, now would that be the time to be recognized? Seeing none, we'll carry on. All right.

We have a change to the agenda tonight. Ordinance 3121, Future Land Use Magic Houses LLC, has been pulled uh from 155 MA Board Street Smallcale Future Land Use Amendment. This item has been pulled. It was scheduled for planning position tonight. The item has been pulled because the applicant failed to meet the deadline mailing for the public hearing notice to the surrounding properties within 300 foot radius as required by LDC 2.4.7. C.2. The item will be rescheduled for se September 9th. Uh city of Apakka did put the advertisement in the paper done by staff on July 18th through Apka chief. So anyone here is for that. Um, I apologize, but that's going to be rescheduled for September. All right, Mr. Chairman, there was one other um item that had been advertised for this evening's meeting as well. It was the Wild Oaks Town Center code overlay and comprehensive plan amendment. Uh, that was advertised. However, the staff did not put that on the agenda. The applicant requested it be on September's agenda. Okay. Do we need to read that into the record or did you just I just announced it for the record. Yes, sir. Out of boy. Okay. Item number one, legislative ordinance number 3105, future land use, 724 West Keen Road. Owners Dave Diwar Keen 40 LLC. Applicant Logan Upsol. Mr. Hamza. Good evening everyone. My name is Air Hamza. Um the applicant has submitted a small scale future land use amendment

for um from agriculture and in progress to residential medium low for properties located at 724 632 and 608 West Keen Road along with 2751 Martin Road. And all four properties are located on the southeast corner of West Keen Road and Martin Road. These are the vicinity and aerial maps of the 724, 632, and 608 West Keen Road, and uh 2751 Martin Road properties. The total site area for all four properties combined is around 38.59 acres. The applicant is requesting the future land use amendment to be able to develop a subdivision in the future that includes single family and town homes, single family homes and town homes. The future land use is agriculture in in progress and uh is proposed to change to residential medium low as shown on the future land use map. The zoning is currently agriculture and transitional proposed to change to RMF residential multifamily as shown on the zoning map. This is a concept plan of the combined properties um that was sent by the applicant and as you can see it in includes single family and town homes but this is not a um this is not a plan that was submitted as it's just a concept plan of what could what may or could come in the future. The development review committee has recommended approval. The recommended motion is to recommend approval of the future land use amendment based on the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Staff and applicant are available for further questions and comments. All right. Anyone have questions of staff? I have a question. All right. Commissioner Washington is noted in the staff report that um we're looking for a proposed residential

medium low future land use designation. Um but um it makes me mention that another project may be submitted in the near future uh with the same land use designation. I'm just curious uh what's the status report on that one? Uh currently they haven't submitted anything as of yet. We've had um u the discussions preliminary discussions um in the you know with staff and uh just applicant but nothing has been submitted as of yet. Yeah. And to add, that property had been annexed in the city um probably in mid 2024. Uh it's about a 30 something acre tract, but as the mayor had indicated, they've had some preliminary meetings with staff about future land use and zoning, but that's about as far as we've gotten so far. Okay. So, there's some activity, some discussion about that. Okay, good sir. All right. Any more questions of staff? Very well. Is applicant present? Do they have a presentation? Good evening. Logan Off, Louns Law Firm, 215 North Yola Drive. Uh, no presentation and I'll be brief. I know it's a big agenda tonight. Thanks to air for the staff report. Um, I'll I'll note this is the uh Doer Nurseries property. Uh, you're likely familiar that there's two properties that make up that operation. This is the southern portions of south side of Keen Road. So, we're not dealing with the north. I just wanted to make that clear if it wasn't already. So, and um you know the area has seen a lot of growth. Uh you have Emerson Park, Hilltop Reserve, um Emerson Point. All of those are within under a mile and and at about 15 units per acre. The concept plan we provided was uh really just an exercise in our discussions with commissioners and with staff. it's to code. Um, but it's conceptual to illustrate that when all

of that's laid in to code, uh, trying to maximize the space, uh, it comes out to about five and a half units an acre. Uh, you know, could be up to six. The way things get clustered in the future, uh, the maximum units would be seven and a half units an acre for our requested future land use and zoning. So, that's that's the reason why you have a concept plan at this juncture. We're not at site plan. That's not what you'll see when when it comes back before this body, but just wanted to give you a little bit more color on on why we did that uh for compatibility and uh density conversations. So, we have representatives from the applicant team here and myself, of course, happy to answer any specific questions you have. All right. Great. Does anyone have questions of the No, sir. All right. Very well. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Your name and address for the record, please. Ma'am, good evening. My name is Francina Boyin. I live at 1484 Elderton Drive, Apakka, Florida, 32703. Um, can I speak? Yeah. Okay. Uh, what whatever you want to say. Oh, sure. Okay. Um, I'm a native of the region of King Road, uh, Lake Jewel. I listened to the gentleman said he told about the other growth with Emerson Park, Emerson uh point, you know, and my neighbor new neighbors, the Emerson, I get them mixed up park or point, but uh they're on the east side of Martin Road,

which abuts, you know, my the subdivision abuts my property. They mentioned those subdivisions, but I didn't hear them mention about the stagnant pollution that's in that area with emissions from the landfill, from the uh wasting center raider. You know, we have all of that in that region. And I've watched this area just bust wide open with growth in the last 15 years. So, uh, with this particular project on Keen Road, uh, how far are you with the status of accepting or rejecting the applicants application? What other stages or what stage are they at this point? What we're doing now is the future land use, which is just a change um, Just to clarify, the state has a map of the entire state and we have to request the future land use change that changes that use from agricultural to industrial, agriculture, residential or vice versa. And then the next step in the process is the zoning, how the city zones that property. Is it residential? Is it industrial? That will be the next agenda item. It's actually right in line with this. Um, as far as what they build there and how they build that, that comes further in the process. If they they'll submit a site plan and then the planning and staff will go over that. The density level is what we're approving now, what they're going to use the land for, but not the specifics of how that's going to be done. This is just to say you can build five houses on every acre, but it doesn't say how that's going to be done. That's more specific later on. But there's actually I I believe with the city council

included four or maybe correct me Bobby five more times that this will be in front of somebody and where you'd have a chance to speak and and oh okay give your opinion. I was just curious as to this seemed to be a very like most of the projects have been for the last 10 years, you know, pretty massive and the traffic that we already endure on shop curve, dead man curve, Martin road, the two-lane twisted highway, I mean roadway, it's not a highway. You know, I grew up when visiting King Road was like we were going out of town. uh all dirt road now scared to even go down King Road is deadly. It's deadly dangerous. is, you know, two more what 200 H homes. You're saying two two 200 more homes that would be proposed for this the theoretically, but we don't have a number on that. Again, the specifics aren't. So, is that you said Martin and King Road? Is that on the west? That's on the west side. What do Nursery? Was Der Nursery? It's a nursery. It's in the southoutheast corner of Martin. Southeast corn. southeast corner because that's where the nursery was, right? Yeah. Well, I was just curious because you know I hope plans are implemented to show how to make modern roads. It's right right here. Okay. That's that's the nursery that's in the ditch, you know. Yeah. The ner This is the southeast corner of Martin and Ke. Oh, okay. Yes. Yeah. My cousin, they were out there in the 50s. Yes, ma'am. I I understand your concerns and tell people make sure y'all tell people that it's a landfill. Ma'am, it's a uh Excuse me, ma'am. Incinerator, ma'am.

You you you have to speak to the board, not to the people in the audience. Okay. All right. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak on this matter? All right. Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and motion. I'd like to propose that we find the proposed change in future land use designation from agriculture in progress to residential medium low capa uh cap capacity with the characters of the surrounding area. recommending approval of the future land use amendment subject to the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Woods. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Washington. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. All right. Item number two, same piece of property. Good evening. Go ahead. This is Quasi Judicial. I would have to ask anyone on the board had any expardate communication on this matter? No, sir. Okay. Quasi judicial ordinance number 3106, change of zoning, 724 West Keen Road. Mr. All right. So this is the for the same property but is uh the applicant is requesting a reszoning from agriculture and transitional to uh residential medium uh residential multif family for properties located at 724 632 608 West Road and 2751 Martin Road and uh again it is located on the southeast corner of West Keen Road and Martin Road intersection.

These are the vicinity and aerial maps of the 724, 632, 608 West Keen Road, and 2751 Martin Romero properties. And again, the total side area of all the four combined properties is a total of 38.59 acres. The applicant is requesting the reszoning to be able to develop a subdivision that includes single family homes and town homes. As mentioned before and shown on these maps, the future land use is currently agriculture and in progress and is proposed to change to residential medium low. The zoning is agriculture and transitional proposed to change to RMF residential multifamily. This is the concept plan as shown before of the combined properties and it was sent by the applicant. The devil has recommended approval. The recommended motion is to recommend approval of the change of zoning based on the findings and facts presented to staff report and exhibits and the staff and applicant are available for further comments and questions. Thank you, Mr. Thompson. All right. Does anyone have questions of staff? No. All right. Does anyone have questions of the applicant? Very well. Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to find the proposed change in zoning from AG agriculture and T transitional to RMF residential multifamily compatible with the character of the surrounding areas. Recommending approval of the change of zoning subject to findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Washington. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second?

I'll second. Second by Commissioner Norwood. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number three, ordinance number 3108, largescale future land use, onish North, owners PMS1 Reo LLC, HMF LLC, Charles P. Stalling, Kim L. Stallings, Ule E Stallings Jr. and Crystal Denise Stallings. Applicant Appen Engineering, Carol Luke Clayson, Miss Sanchez. Good evening. Jean Sanchez with the community development department. Um before we get started, I'd like to ask that we strike that first paragraph under the summary of the staff report as it doesn't relate it was erroneously placed there. Um but this request tonight um is uh to recommend approval of the future land use amendment for Andage North from county rural to residential estate. The subject properties are located on the northwest corner of State Road 453, 429, and Onage Road. It's approximately 196 acres in size. The applicant requests a future land use map amendment from Orange County Rural to City of Apakka residential estates to allow low density residential development with enhanced open space preservation accordance with the city's comp plan comprehensive plan. The subject property lies within the northern planning area of the joint planning area JPA between Orange County and the city of Apakka. The area is characterized by large tracks of open land with minimal existing development. The proposed amendment is intended to facilitate a clustered single family residential development that will provide a transitional density between the Kelly Park interchange for base code

to the south to the south and the surrounding rural lands. The proposed future land use amendment creates a clear and logical PLA pattern of transitioning densities from high intensity near KPI to rural levels northward, especially given its proximity to State Road 453. The DRC recommends approval. The recommended motion is to find the proposed amendment consistent with the comp plan and compatible with the character of surrounding area and therefore recommend approval of the change in future land use from county rural to residential to residential estate for onage north as well as well as transmitt to Florida commerce staff and applicant are available for questions. Okay. Anyone have questions of Anyone have questions of staff? Question. All right. Commissioner Washington. Uh good evening. You said to strike which paragraph? It's the first paragraph under summary. It's referencing rule um I think it's role settlement which we initially discussed with the applicant. Um so the first paragraph starts with the subject properties are approximately. Yes. So that whole paragraph is out as what what it should have started with is the applicant request. Yes. Okay. I wish I knew that. I spent about 10 hours on that one paragraph. No, you did not. It only took you 30 minutes to read that. I don't think you noticed it until I pointed it out. I thought there was a lot of language in there to be honest with you. But I mean the the two designations are very similar in nature, but um we decided on the residential estate better is better suited for this for these properties. Okay. Does anyone else have questions of staff? I wanted to ask about I saw something about a habitat study or habitat evaluation. It's required um so require that with

when um projects undergo development review um anything over 10 acres we require habit habit a habitat study as as well as environmental assessment for any projects as well. Yeah, they usually go hand in hand. All right. Anyone else question of staff? All right. Is the applicant here and do they have a presentation? They don't have one. Okay. Does anyone have any questions for the applicant? Yes, sir. Very well. Is there anyone from the public that's here that wishes to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we find the proposed future land use amendment from county rural to residential estate consistent with comprehensive plan and land development code compatible with the character surrounding area. The recommended approval of the future land use amendment and transmental to Florida Commerce. Motion by Commissioner Norwood. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second? I'll second it. Commissioner Woods. Thank you, sir. All in favor say I. I any opposed? Motion carries. All right. Item number four, legislative ordinance 3110, future land use amendment, the summit at Wolf Lake Ranch, Wolf Lake Ranch, phase three. Owners David Lutz, David L. Life estate, Lutz, Mary T. Life estate, David M. Lutz, Michelle M. Great. Applicant William Mackey. Location north of Ponan Road, west of Ponan Pine Road, and west of Jason Dwelly Parkway. Miss Sanchez.

Again, Jean Sanchez with the community development department. This is a request to recommend approval of the future land use map amendment for mixed use to residential very low suburban for the summit at Wolf Lake Ranch. The subject properties are situated north of Ponen Road, west of Ponan Pines Road, as well as Jason Dwelli Parkway and is over 21 acres in size. The applicant seeks to amend the future land use designation of about 21 acres from mixed use, which permits up to 15 dwelling units per acre to residential very low suburban, which allows up to two dwelling units per acre. The proposed land use change is intended to facilitate a future resoning and residential development consistent with adjacent phases of the Wolf Lake Ranch community. Subject site is currently undeveloped and designated mixed use on the adopted future land use map. The property is located west of the existing Wolf Lake Ranch phases one and two and is anticipated to be developed as phase three of the community. The surrounding area is characterized by detached single family residential homes on large lots. The proposed residential baro suburban designation would serve as a logical extension of the Wolf Lake Ranch phases one and two developments and provide a compatible transition to surrounding properties. The development review committee recommends approval. The recommended motion is to recommend approval of the change in future land use designation from mixed use to residential vero suburban for the summit of Wolf Lake Ranch. Staff and applicant are available for questions. Thank you, Miss Sanchez. Anyone have questions of staff? I do. Commissioner Washington, can you rewind back to the zoning map? This one? Yeah. Yes. uh has nothing to do quite frankly with the um decision in the hand now. But as

I look at that zoning map in the future, does the owner uh have an influence on that other piece of property that's at the top of the te called the T which seems to be running eventually over to Plymouth Rento Road. This one right here. Yes. I know I know it's not part I'm just curious is that does the owner have an influence on that? I I'm not aware, sir. Um, I don't know if they do. I suggest you ask them when it's time for the applicant to come up here. I don't think they mentioned any kind of influence on that northern property though. Okay. To us. Very well. Any more questions of staff? Very well. Any questions of the applicant? Anyone? Well, here he is. Well, Commissioner Washington, did you get my question, sir? Repeat your question for this record. Okay. Uh, I clearly understand what you're looking for approval for today. That's great. Uh, I don't live too far from there. It's an amazing project you have going on up there. But just curious, um, just an eye to the future. Right above uh, just north immediately north, there's property that runs from the east all the way over to Plymouth Road. Right. Is that yours? No. No. With this this is the just the the yellow on the right hand side of the this is the existing Wolf Lake Ranch property partially developed. The other portion is going through the staff review. We got the zoning approved on it. So this is going to be considered phase three. Yes. But nothing north of us is part of our application or you know what we're doing here. Just curious. Yeah. My name is Tom Dailyaly, by the way. Uh, I'm here with Daily Design Group, 913 North Pennsylvania Avenue. I'm here on behalf of the the property

owners and the applicant. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Anyone else listen to the Very welcome. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to find the proposed future land use amendment from mixed use to residential very low suburban consistent with the comprehensive plan and land development code and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas. Recommend approval of the proposed future land use amendment based on the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Washington. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? A second. Second by Commissioner Norwood. All in favor say I. Any opposed? Motion carries. All right. This is quasi judicial. Same piece of property. Has anyone on the board had exparte communication on this matter? No, sir. All righty. Ordinance number 3111 change of zoning summit at Wolf Lake Wolf Lake Ranch phase three owner David Lutz life estate applicant William Mackey location north of Ponan Road west of Ponan Pines Road and Jason Dwelly Parkway Miss Sanchez for the record Jean Sanchez with the planning and zoning division. This is the companion reszoning request for the summit at Wolf Lake or Ranch requesting to recommend approval of the change of zoning from MUSGT mixeduse eastshore gateway to RSF-1B which is residential single family large lot. The applicant requests a resoning of

approximately 21 acres from MUSGT to RSF-1B to facilitate the development of a low density detached single family residential subdivision. The proposed development will consist of 42 single family homes consistent with the character and density of the adjacent Wolf Lake Ranch phases one and two. The subject site lies west of the existing Wolf Lake Ranch community and is currently undeveloped. The requested zoning is compatible with the proposed future land use designation and the surrounding land use pattern. The site is envisioned as phase three of the Wolf Lake Ranch community providing a seamless continuation of the development in this area. The DRC recommends approval. The recommended motion is to recommend approval of the change of re of zoning from mixeduse eastshore gateway to residential single family large lot for the summit of Wolf Lake Ranch. Staff and applicant are available for questions. Thank you, Miss Sanchez. We have questions of staff or applicant. Yes, sir. Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for a discussion and a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to recommend a motion to find the proposed change of zoning consistent with the comprehensive plan and compatible with the character of the surrounding area and recommend approval of the change of zoning from MUSGT mixeduse shore gateway to RSF1B residential single family large lot for the summit at Wolf Lake Ranch. Motion by Commissioner Woods. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Norwood. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Item number six, ordinance 3119, future land use amendment, Cold Link Logistics, owners MG88, Central Florida, Cold Storage 2 LLC. Applicant Joshua Enoch, location 2424 and 2428 West Orange Blossom Trail. Mr. Hamler For record, Amir Hamza, uh, the applicant has submitted a smallcale future land use amendment from County Industrial to City Industrial for property located at, uh, 2424 and 2428 uh, West Orange Blossom Trail, just west of Al Burch Avenue and east of School Street. These are the vicinity and aerial maps of the 2424 and 2428 West Orange Blossom Trail sites. The total uh combined site area for both properties is 0.38 acres. The app the applicant is requesting the future land use amendment to be able to expand the existing coal link logistics facility surrounding both properties. As mentioned before and shown on these maps, um the future land use is county industrial and proposed to change to city industrial. Zoning is a transitional proposed to change to light industrial. The development review committee has recommended approval. The recommended motion is to recommend approval of the future land use amendments subject to the findings of presented in the staff reporting exhibits. Staff and applicant are available for further questions and comments. Thank you, Mr. Hamza. Is anyone having questions of staff or the applicant? Very well. Is anyone from the public who wish to speak on this matter?

Bring it back to board for discussion and a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion and find the proposed change in future land use designation from county industrial to city industrial compatible with the character of the surrounding areas. Recommending approval of the future land use amendment subject to the finding and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Norwood. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second? I'll second it. Second by Commissioner Woods. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item seven, same piece of property. This is quasi judicial. So I need to ask, has anyone on the board had exparte communication on this matter? No sir. Very well. Quasi judicial ordinance number 3120 change of zoning cold link logistics owners MG88 central Florida cold storage 2 LLC. Applicant Joshua Hinat 2424 2428 West Orange Blossom Tree. Mr. Hamza, for the record, Amir Hamza, the applicant is requesting a reszoning from transitional to light industrial for properties located at 2424 and and 2428 West Orange Blossom Trail, again with just west of Albert Avenue and east of School Street. These are the vicinity and aerial maps of the 2424 and 2428 West Orange Blossom Trail site. The total combined uh area for both sites together um is 0.38 acres. Again, the applicant is requesting the reszoning of both properties to be able to expand the existing coal logistics facility that surrounding both properties. The future land use is a county industrial and proposed to change to city industrial. Zoning is a

transitional and proposed to change to light industrial. The development review committee has recommended approval. The recommended motion is to recommend approval of the change of zoning uh subject to the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits and staff and applicant are available to refer to comments and questions. Thank you Mr. Hamza. Anyone have questions of the applicant or excuse me, staff or the applicant? Very well. Does 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'll make a motion of the final proposed change in change of zoning from transitional to light industrial compatible with the character of surrounding areas recommending approval of the change of zoning subject to the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Norwood. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Washington. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Legislative Ordinance Number 3122, Smallscale Future Land Use Amendment, 1920 Sheieler Avenue. Owners Marvin Wade Reed and Susan Thomas Reed. Applicant Jonathan Hughes. Oh, Hughes, I'm sorry. Location 1920 Sheieler Avenue. Mr. Song. Good evening. This is Junzone planner at the community development devel department. The applicant has requested a small scale future land use amendment for the properties located at 1920 Sher Avenue. The total size of the properties is about 40 acre. They are currently vacant and residential. The current future land use is county

rule allowing one dwelling unit per 10 acre and low density allowing four dwelling unit per acre. The applicant has request to change its future land use to residential low suburban which allows up to 3.5 dwelling unit per acre. Surrounding properties within the city has a future land use of residential low and residential high. DRC has recommended approval and the re um and the recommended motion is recommend approval of the proposed change of future land use for 1920 Shaw Avenue steps and of the applicant are available to answer any questions. Very well. Thank you Mr. Does anyone have questions of staff? No. Anyone have questions of the applicant? Does the applicant have a presentation? Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board. A motion. Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to find the proposed change of future land use designation from county rural and rural settlement low density to city RLS residential low suburban consistent with the comprehensive plan and land development code and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas. Recommend approval of the proposed change of future land use based on the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Washington. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? I'll second it. Second by Commissioner Woods. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Item number nine, same piece of property, quasi judicial. I have to ask, has anyone on the board had any exparte communication on this matter? Yes, sir. Very well. Ordinance number 3123, change of zoning, 1920 Sheiler Avenue. Owners Marvin Wayne Reed and Susan Thomas Reed. Applicant Jonathan Hules. Location 1920 Sheieler Avenue. Mr. Song. For the record, this is Jones planning at the community development department. The applicant has requested a resing of the per of reszoning for properties located at 1920 Shower Avenue. The total size of the properties is about 40 acre and they're currently vacant and residential. Current zoning is T transition and the requested zoning is RTF residential to family. Surrounding properties within the city are zoned for residential. The DRC has recommended approval and recommended motion is recommend approval of the proposed change of zoning for 1920 Shaw Avenue. staff and appreciable to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Song. Anyone have questions of staff or the applicant? Very well. Does 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'll make a motion that we find the proposed change of zoning from transitional to residential to family district consistent with the comprehensive plan and land development code and compatible with the character of surrounding areas. Recommend approval of the proposed change of zoning based on the findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Norwood. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second?

I'll second it. Second by Commissioner Woods. Thank you, sir. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number 10. This is quasi judicial ordinance number 3124. I have to ask has anyone on the board had any exparte communication on this matter? Yes sir. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Wood, I would like to abstain from this uh particular one um my uh HOA which I'm on the board of directors property abuts this uh particular development. Very well. Commissioner Woods recused himself. Right. So, no one else has had any exparte communication. Move on. Ordinance 3124. Change of zoning plan development amendment. Shops at East Shore owners East Shops LLC. Applicants Lounge Care of Jonathan Hules. Location Northwest corner of AOY Paper Road and West Keem Road. Miss Sanchez. Again, Jean Sanchez with the community development department. This is a request to recommend approval of the amendment to the shops at East Shore PD. The subject property is situated on the northeast corner of Okoa Papco Road and West Kane Road, approximately 28 acres in size. The original PD for the shops at Eastshore was approved on November 2023. The property is planned for mixeduse development including commercial and

senior housing components. During the site development and subsequent engineering process, it was determined that the storm water needs of the project could be could be met without the use of lot six previously reserved for storm water pond. The applicant proposes then to amend the PD to allow the commercial development on the lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting to convert lot six from a storm water track to commercial out parcel with five with 5,000 square ft of new commercial entitlements, adding tire sales and service as an allowed use within the PD and incorporate the updated PD master plan and updated exhibits A and B. The DRC recommends approval and the recommended motion is to recommend approval of the proposed shops at Eastshore PD amendment. Staff and applicant are available for questions. Thank you, Miss Sanchez. I'm going to have questions of staff. I have a question for the Commissioner Washington for the developer Okay. the applicant. Does anyone have questions of the applicant? Yes. Very well. Commissioner Washington, Mr. Hules. Uh, good evening, Chairman and Commissioners. My name is Jonathan Hules with the Louns Law Firm, 215 North Yola Drive, Orlando 32801. And whenever you're ready, I'm ready to answer your questions. Could let you sit back there too long. Good to stretch my legs. So, appreciate it. No, I'm just curious. the um so lot six is no longer needed for storm water and uh you're going to develop it by putting in a tire shop or service. I think that's the case, right? Uh I'm not sure if that's the specific use for that out parcel. Uh the the addition of tire sales and service was was added to this

amendment because if if you're opening up the PD u it's it's a process that requires a lot of work. And so it's oftentimes a developer will say well these are some items I'd like to to tweak if we're going to go in. And so it had been thought for a while to approach the city. We actually had some dialogue with staff previously about whether tire sales and service was covered by automobile uh service station which was already a permitted use in the PD staff determined it was not. So as part of this amendment it was it was a cleanup measure to make clear that tire sales and service was a permitted use. Okay. So as the property was being developed, what happened that um made it um that determined that the property was no longer needed for storm water? Yeah. So how's the storm water? Did you underestimate it? Did you manage it differently? What happened? Good question. So the the plan that Gan had presented and and perhaps that's on here if I just push it back arrow. Yeah. Um the the area in questions here, I don't know if you can see my parcel six. I see it. So as part of th this project, this mixeduse project that has multiple phases, multiple uses, including dental office, the Publix that's anchoring the retail, it's got a um a senior housing component. Um it it um this plan needed to be presented as part of the approval of the zoning the PD and so it was prepared conservatively showing that area as a storm water pond. That was not a engineered plan. It was a con somewhat of a conceptual plan that did not go through the full 100% engineering. Once that process would once the PD was approved showing that area as a storm

water pond that the next steps in the development process were undertaken which include uh the construction site planning and the actual permitting with the water management district. When those exercises were undertaken, it was determined that the rear dry ponds shown here uh as parcel I believe that's five or six um was was sufficient to accommodate the entire project. And so the engineering plans that now have been approved by the St. John's River Water Management District and the city for development of the overall parcel property have been designed and will be constructed to accommodate storm water for the entirety. Meaning that this originally proposed storm water pond on on that fronted it on on the on the public road was no longer necessary and so it could be reprogrammed for a higher and better use than just open space and provide additional retail opportunities for for the residences in the area. Okay. Thank you. Very well. Anyone? Well, there's only one option. Do you have any questions? Yeah. No. Very well. Thank you, Mr. Schules. Anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for a motion. Not a lot of options. Got be. Okay. Mr. Chairman, you're going to bend my arm. I'll make the motion. uh to find the proposed amendment to the PD plan development consistent with the comprehensive plan and compatible with the character of the surrounding area and recommend approval of the sharps at Eastshore PD plan development amendment

based on the fact findings and facts presented in the staff report and exhibits. Motion by Commissioner Washington. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? I will second. Commissioner Norwood. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. All right. Item number 11, ordinance number 3125, future land use amendment, Pali Acres Residential. Residential owners Pali Acres LLC. Applicant Daniel O'Keefe. Location east side of Vic Road, approximately quarter mile north of the intersection of Vic Road and West Lester Road. Mr. How? Thank you. Good evening. For the record, Bobby How, Planning Manager. The applicant has submitted a small-scale future land use amendment from county low density, which permits a maximum density, four dwelling units per acre, to city residential low suburban, which permits a maximum of three and a half dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting the future land use amendment from two city residential low suburban order to develop a portion of a planned development consisting of single family detached and town home units on the subject property. The city council voted unanimously to annex the subject properties into the city via ordinance 3113. The total site area is 39.85 acres and is located on the east side of Vic Road, approximately a quarter mile north of the intersection of Vic Road and West Lester Road. The applicant is requesting the future land use amendment to allow as I mentioned the development of town homes and non-resident and I'm sorry for develop development of town homes and single family homes on the property. Orange County Public Schools has indicated that all units are vested qualifying the capacity requirement as dimminimous. The development review committee recommends approval.

Recommended motion this afternoon and this evening is to approve the small scale future land use amendment. Um staff questions applicant is here as well. Thank you, Mr. How to have questions of staff. No, sir. Anyone have questions for the applicant? I do. All right. Very well. The applicant, please come forward. Good evening. Elisa Salutzen Bowen, 300 South Orange uh South Orange Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32801. This is just a general question. Um, in your master plan for the whole area, you have um I think it's like 10 acres or something more than that for a public park for the whole uh development that you're doing there. So, the overall project is 618 acres. It is proposed for currently 1,52 homes and up to 10 and approximately 10 acres of commercial uses. And then there is proposed a city park that we've been discussing dedicating um approximately 145 acres. Okay. How this is just general question once you start developing this whenever that happens how soon in the development process will you be doing the park because I understand that becomes a city park at some point along that is what we are working through right now in terms of time frame we've been working with city staff and the applicant in terms of understanding what makes sense and what would work best but we understand the city would like the park as soon as possible. Okay. So, are you looking at the beginning, the middle, or the end of the We're looking more towards the

beginning. Um potentially at the end of the beginning because the park is proposed to include um a significant a significant amount of trails so that the developer would be installing as well. So, we want to ensure that a the developer owns the property and b that that development is occurring along with um adjacent development as well. So towards the beginning of the property, towards the beginning of the project as opposed to the end. Okay. Thank you. Of course. Anything else? Anyone else have questions of the applicant? Very well. Thank you, ma'am. Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to find the proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and compatible with the character of the surrounding area and recommend approval of the change in future land use designation from county low density to city residential low suburban or partuki acres. Motion by Commissioner Wood. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? Second. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Washington. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number 12, not the same piece of property, but the same applicant. Ordinance number 3126, future land use amendment, Palucci Acres commercial, owner, Palooi Acres LLC. applicant Daniel O'Keefe south side of Ponan Road west of Jason Deli Parkway. Mr. How Thank you once again for the record. Bobby How, planning manager. Applicant has submitted a small scale future land

use amendment from residential low suburban to commercial for a 5.789 acre parcel located on the south side of Ponan Road west of Jason Dwelling Parkway across from Wolf Lake Elementary and Middle Schools. The applicant is requesting the future land use a amendment to commercial to allow the property to be developed as a non-residential portion of the Pluchi Acres PUD that is currently under review. This is the site location. A little bit of a better look at it. Uh it's approximately here where you see the word site location and this kind of is the natural buffer of it. The schools are across the street. The park uh the city park is up to the north. The development review committee recommends approval. Recommended motion this evening is approval. If you have any questions, myself and the applicant are available. Very well. Thank you, Mr. Hal. Anyone have questions of staff? I do. Commissioner Washington. Sir, I need your help. Okay. Need a I need a macro view here. Paluchi Estates suggest a huge piece of property now. So, um, it looks like this, what we're looking at right here is a piece of the overall property. Yeah. Let me see. We just got finished approving the residential piece which is on Vic Road, which is below Ponan to the east. So, fill it in for me. Sure. How does all this fit in right states? Yes. And as you heard from the applicant's representative, it's about a 615 acre project. The piece that was just recently uh recommended for approval is down here. This is the 40 acres that I've highlighted. It's in blue. Everything that they've outlined in red is the Pali property. This is the proposed uh area for the possible city park that's under negotiation. This right here where I'm pointing is the

item that's under consideration right now, the commercial piece. Up to the north is more property owned by Paluchi and then on the north side of of Punken Road and it goes on the east side. So it's a massive piece of property. Uh 615 acres,52 units if I recall correctly is what they had indicated. this piece. There's going to be a commercial parcel that's been depicted on the PUD and we're currently negotiating with the applicant on the fine details of the PUD, but I believe there was commercial portion proposed right here adjacent dwelling and this would be another commercial area. So, that's kind of the overview of the property and the kind of the missing pieces of it. So, I I presume that the customer or the customer the applicant is not going to be uh will not find a hardship in developing it with those lakes that are there. There are lakes there, are there not? Yes. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So, uh but all right, they're aware of it, then they are aware of it. Yes, sir. Okay. Anyone else have questions of staff? And we have questions for the applicant. 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'll make a motion that we find proposed amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and compatible with the character of the surrounding area and recommend approval of the change in future land use designation from residential low suburban to commercial for Paluchi acres. Motion by Commissioner Norwood. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Washington. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

All right. Site plan number one. Subject Spring Haven Chandler Hills. Major development plan. owners Orchid Estates HOA Community, Mega GNG LLC, Jacob Snavely, 4625 Chandler Road LLC, Matthew and Deborah Shaw, Daphne Martin, H Walter Robinson III, Yunick Irevocable Trust, PM S1 LLC, applicant Luke Clayson, PE. Location 2350 West Kelly Park Road. Mr. How Thank you. For the record, Bobby How, planning manager. The applicant is requesting approval of a major development plan with a total 392 single family dwelling units at a density of 3.38 dwelling units per acre on 117.16 acres. The neighborhood character zone permits a maximum density of five dwelling units per acre. The master plan was approved for this project by the city council on February 19th, 2025. And if you'll recall, this came before this board prior to that for a recommendation of approval as well. The design is consistent with the approved master plan and consists of front-loaded and rear loaded lots. Lots range from 34 to 34 feet to 60 ft in width. Within the formbbased code area of which this project is located, there are no minimum and max minimum and maximum lot size and living area requirements in the formbbased code area. Access to the site is proposed by a west Kelly Park road. A dedication of a 30- foot wide strip for future rightway needs for Kelly Park Road is detailed on the major development plan was also detailed on the um master plan that was approved by the city council. Roadway and pedestrian connections will be provided to allow cross access to the properties to the west and east as such time they develop that was depicted on the master plan as well. In accordance with the requirements of formbbased code, 20% of the total site areas required to remain

open space, the applicant has provided 32.59% of the site is open space. Common recreation elements include amenity and pocket parks, green space with internal trail systems, passive open space, recreational areas, and the dedication of a bike trail along Kelly Park Road that has been kind of common place for a lot of developments in the form-based code area, the 12t wide multi-use path that we've been requiring. The applicant is also dedicating a 15 foot wide strip and a 50 foot wide strip for future rideway needs for Chandler Road along the portion of the property that's under their ownership. Vehicular point of ingress egress will be constructed that will allow access onto the future Chandler Road right away. The development review committee recommends approval. The recommended motion this evening is approval. Uh myself and the applicant are available for any questions you might have. Thank you, Mr. Hal. Anyone have questions of staff? No, sir. Very well. I do have a quick question. Um, it's more a detail on the the building setbacks. It says 10 foot minimum, front street side, 15 foot minimum, 30 foot maximum, rear uh for the rear loaded or the front loaded is the 15t minimum. Is a 15 foot minimum from the easement back to the actual dwelling or is that from the street edge to the dwelling? It's from the back of the curb to the dwelling. So from the back of the curb, so there's a sidewalk put there, then it's a 10 foot driveway. Well, it would be a 15 foot. So what I was meaning is from the back of the curb. That's where the property begins. So if you have a sidewalk, it's in the ride ofway. So it's on their property. That's where the setback begins. Okay. I understand. All right. Very well. All right. Anyone have questions of the applicant? I do. All right. the applicant here. There you are.

Luke Class 1828 engineering. Your name and address for the record. I'm sorry. Oh, sorry. Um 2400 Maintenance Center Parkway. Um M Florida 32751. Um question I have concerning the storm water um next to the playground for the uh school. Um just a little concern that a retention pond is so close to where kids will be out there playing during the course of the day. I know there's a fence that the school has between that property and um the school, but again it's a dry pond. Correct. Correct. um when it becomes a wet pond sometime during the course of the school year I'm just concerned with you know um what type of insect activity and that could interfere with the mosquitoes and that um into the school. Well, um I will say it's designed as a dry pond, so it's supposed to it recovers within 72 hours is the requirements by the state statutes and by city code. Uh it is lower than the school, so everything be draining towards it. As a dry pond, it should not say it shouldn't have water retention in it and produce any insects. Wet ponds would typically be more of a concern with that where you'd have stagnant water. Yeah. But as a dry pond, it should recover and you won't have um the the ability for the insects to grow there. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else have questions? The Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. Anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Very well. Bring it back to the board for a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to

recommend approval of the Spring Haven Major Development Plan. Motion by Commissioner Norwood. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Washington. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Do we have any old business? Yeah. Um, Mr. Chair, this will probably fall under old business. U attorney hand I said Mr. Mr. Chair, this would probably fall under old business. Attorney Hand would like to give a little overview of Senate Bill 180 and new platting requirements. Very well. Thank you. And in five minutes or fewer, I've presented both of these topics before, but I I believe not the full commission wasn't here. Some of the times that I did, I got a specific question as to how it affects this board, these two pieces of legislation. So, brass tax, very simple. Uh Senate Bill 180 is a comprehensive emergency bill that touches upon uh development among a number of topics um related to emergency management. And essentially what this bill did when it became law is it retroactively to last August and going f forward to October 1st, 2027 prohibits the city from adopting more restrictive or burdensome amendments to its comprehensive plan or land development regulations. Um this is what caused the uh the comp plan rewrite to to go through some some reworking. Um also prevents any uh type of moratorum So in other words, what this does is it doesn't change the way that this board works at all, but it does essentially prevent the city from adopting more burdensome requirements accordingly. You can still make recommendations as a board, but it does tie your hands. If the city were to adopt something, uh there are some penalties in place where someone can challenge that and u

basically receive remnumeration for that. As far as the other bill relating to platting, what this one does is it essentially takes final plats out of both city council's hands and out of this board's hands. So going forward and uh there's been a temporary resolution adopted by city council. Essentially, it makes any plat approval, final plat approval administrative. And uh there will be a an ordinance presumably coming before this board next month uh scheduled for next month that accomplishes this change as well as dealing with some of the changes from last year for expedited permitting that relate to platting. So that does change how plats are approved. They're now going to be approved by the city administrator uh through consultation with the community development part department um in order to comply with the law. That said, as board, you still review the master plan. You still go through that site plan process and subdivision is contemplated within that process. So, you'll still be looking at how the land is subdivided as uh the development goes through the the development pipeline. And in a nutshell, that's it. And if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer it answer them. Um I'm believe I'm doing some education on a number of topics. Is it next month or next month? So, if there's something that you think about between now, if you don't have a question today, but if you read something and and have a question next month, we'll have some time to to further address um if you have anything for me. Also, of course, always free to send me a message and I'm happy to take a look at it and get you any answer you need. Did you just did you just mention one bill or two? Two bills. The uh one relating to emergency management is Senate Bill 180, right? The other one is Senate Bill 784

that specifically addresses planning. Okay. Thank you. Is there like a brief synopsis of that could be emailed to us? We can just read it. Uh the Senate Bill 18 Senate Bill 18 is a very long bill. I should have some materials on that. I know uh our firm is going to be putting out a memo just updating on some of the leg legislative updates outline. I I'll try to find one for Senate Bill 180. There's already been a lot of material written about it. A massive amount of trouble, but I would just make it easier. The platting statute is very short. It it simply just says, hey, this has got to be through the administrative process. U now the rest of the the platting chapter doesn't match that change. So, I think that we'll see further changes hopefully um this upcoming legislative session because right now we've got kind of a peacemeal plat chapter that uh unfortunately isn't entirely coherent. Um it's rather contradictive. No other way to to put it. I think uh you know it was a last minute change and and to get it through I there's no way that the legislature could do an entire chapter rewrite. So they definitely do have some things to address. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. So, just real quick, I think you just said the bottom line is the master plan and the site plan comes to us still goes through the same process. So, nothing changes. The only thing that is different is you will no longer have final plats on on your agenda. That's it. That's it. You can still ask questions about the subdivision during the pipeline process when you're reviewing uh plans and so forth. Okay. Any other business? new business. Very well.