Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good morning, everyone. We will call this meeting of the Lake County Planning and Zoning Board to order. If you would all please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for a moment of silence. 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. You all remain standing for a moment of silence. Thank you, you may be seated. The Lake County Planning and Zoning Board is an advisory board to the Board of County Commissioners. This board is responsible for reviewing proposed changes to the comprehensive plan, zoning, conditional uses, mining site plans, and making recommendations on these applications to the Board of County Commissioners. The recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Board are transmitted to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration at a scheduled public hearing. In this instance, The cases on our agenda today are scheduled to be heard on the April 7th Board of County Commissioners meeting at 9 a.m.

Okay, well let's go ahead and move into agenda.

Is there any change, update, or other modification to our agenda?

Good morning, Janie Barone, Planning Manager with the Office of Planning and Zoning. For the record, proof of advertisement is shown on the screen, and the cases on the agenda have been duly noticed in accordance with state statute. For agenda update, Tab 3, Cedar Creek Rural Conservation Subdivision, the applicant has withdrawn the request from the public hearing process. And for Tab 6, Haines Creek Estates PUD Amendment, A memo containing opposition correspondence has been provided and is located in the dais. As a result, the case will be moved to the regular agenda. However, the applicant is present and will be requesting a formal postponement. And that is it for the agenda update. Thank you.

Okay. So just for clarification. Tab three, which is Cedar Creek Rural Conservation Subdivision, the applicant has withdrawn, is that correct?

They're withdrawing from the public hearing process, yes ma'am. Okay. They will still be proceeding with the Rural Conservation Subdivision design in accordance with the LDR, which will not require the public hearing process. And if there's any changes, the applicant will have to request a rescheduling of the public hearing. Understood, okay.

So we will not be hearing tab three. And then, let's see, we do have a speaker card for tab four, which is Greater Groves Planned Unit Development Amendment. And then you also said tab six, correct? Yes, ma'am. That they're here, but we have the opposition packet for tab six, correct? That's correct. Okay. And tab eight is already, okay. So that leaves the consent agenda with tab one, two, five, and seven, correct? Correct. Are there any other changes to our consent agenda or anyone else needing to make changes at this time? Okay, we'll continue. We're not moving into approval of it. We're just agenda updating at the moment. Okay, where's the rest? All right, has everyone had an opportunity to review the minutes from February 4th? Are there any changes or adjustments to those minutes? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Moved. All right, we have a motion for approval on the minutes from February 4th. Is there a second?

Second.

Oh, got two seconds. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, same.

was not present.

Understood. Okay. Madam Chairman, you still have to vote on that. Oh, I'm like, me? No, your attention, but you still have to vote. You can't abstain on the grounds that you weren't here. You should have been able to read the minutes, and you can certainly have the clerk notate that you weren't here for those meetings, but we still need you to vote on it.

Approved. Okay. Do we need to do an audible vote again?

We just need to know whether you're gonna vote for or against.

Okay, so that's unanimous for approval, correct? Got it. To you, because you weren't present and we're gonna abstain, but I had already voted. Okay, so at this time, we will welcome anyone from the public who wishes to speak on an item not on our agenda today. So if there's anything that is not being considered by this board, this is an opportunity from anyone in the public who may wish to speak on anything that's not being considered today. Is there anyone who wishes to speak on anything at this time? Okay, seeing none. We will now move on to review of consent agenda. Currently on our consent agenda is tab 1, tab 2, tab 5, tab 7. Is there any additional questions, comments, or concerns related to those items before we vote on the consent agenda? Anyone? Or wish to hear a full presentation of anything? All right. Then I would entertain a motion on the consent agenda, which is now made up of tabs one, two, five, and seven motion to approve. I have a motion. Is there a second, second, all those in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed. Same motion carries. Okay. We will now move into our regular agenda, which will begin with tab four.

Good morning. For the record, Leslie Regan, Senior Planner with the Office of Planning and Zoning. I will be presenting tab four, case number PZ 2025-132, otherwise known as Greater Groves. The applicant is requesting to amend and restate the Planned Unit Development Ordinance 1994-195 for the property within the Greater Groves Planned Unit Development. to add language to facilitate for the enforcement of regulations for parking of specific vehicles. The property is located west of US 27, east of Boggy Marsh and north of CR 474 and contains approximately 233 acres. The subject property is currently designated with the Green Swamp Ridge Future Land Use and Zone Planned Unit Development. The added language purpose is to enforce already existing regulations regarding street parking of recreational vehicles and boats and other specified vehicles within the planned unit development boundary Staff finds the rezone consistent with land development regulations and the comprehensive plan and I'll stand for any questions Does anyone have any questions for staff before we?

hear from the applicant

Yes, for the record, since this is a mandatory HOA, why is there a PUD amendment instead of just amending the bylaws of the HOA?

So in order for code enforcement to enforce these regulations that are within our land development regulations, this language must be put inside the planned unit development.

Is this a gated community? Oh, sorry.

Just to clarify on that question, they could amend their restrictive covenants, but then they would have to enforce it through whatever mechanism their restrictive covenants allows them to do. They're choosing to incorporate it because they want to use code enforcement instead.

Is this subdivision gated? It is not. And they're public roads?

They are.

Thank you. My question probably is dovetailing off of yours. Because they're public roads, why would we prohibit on, are the roads not designed for on-street parking?

This is for specified vehicles such as recreational vehicles, boats, trailers, things like that. My understanding is there was some impediment of traffic two ways on those roads with this kind of parking on the roads.

And I believe Section 306 also, if they're going to park in their yards, they've got to be behind building setbacks and things like that. So it's not just limited to the roads themselves.

So maybe you can answer this for me, Melanie. The standard PD ordinance language that we put in, doesn't it typically state that the other regulations still apply unless specifically excluded?

Newer ordinances do.

This is an older one.

This is very old. This is from the 90s, I think. 1994. 1994.

It's not that old.

But it was the Wild West. So in this situation, though, it didn't defer to our land development regulations unless otherwise stated.

That's correct. And the other thing with Section 306 is it specifically identifies certain zoning districts, and a PUD is not an identified zoning district in that code section.

Understood. Are there any other questions for staff before we hear from the applicant? Okay. If the applicant's present, do they wish to make any statements or provide any information at this time? Is the applicant present or a representative of the applicant? Do we have an official representative here or maybe the person on the application? Okay, so we will go ahead and move into public comment then. So I do have one speaker card on this, James White. This is for tab four, Greater Groves PD Amendment. If you can come up and just tell us which one you were looking to speak on so I can make sure this is on the right. Case.

Rezoning to allow many storage.

That's tab eight.

Hang on folks, sorry. Just a moment.

Wrong one?

Yes. Okay. So.

He's looking for tab eight.

Yeah, you're looking for tab eight. All right. Which is the Serenoa PD amendment, is that correct?

I didn't see that, yeah.

Okay, I'm just gonna amend your card to say tab eight. Okay. Does anyone else have anything they wish to speak on on this matter or any member of the public who wishes to speak on this item at this time? Okay, seeing none, we can bring it back to the board. Does anyone else have questions for staff? Okay, if there's no further questions or comment or discussion, I would entertain a motion.

Motion to approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Is there any need for further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same. Motion carries unanimously. Okay, we will now move on to tab six, which is the Haynes Creek Estates PUD amendment.

Good morning. Chuck Hyatt, 902 North Sinclair Avenue.

Wait, hold on. I'm sorry. Staff. I need staff to come forward and present the case for Tab 6.

They were requesting a postponement.

Okay.

But I can go ahead and present, and then he can.

No, I just wanted to make sure I understood what we were doing on staff first. So before we present the case, they're requesting postponement. Okay, thank you. Sorry about that.

Again, Chuck Hyatt, 902 North Sinclair Avenue, with half. On behalf of the applicant, we would like to postpone to a date certain. When this application was initiated, it was initiated with a builder that was under contract. Since then, that builder has backed out of the contract and there's a new builder involved. We want to basically get with the new builder and make sure that there's nothing else that they want to add or subtract before coming back to you guys again. So with that, we'd like to request to postpone to date certain.

What date are you looking for?

60 days from here, from today, please.

May 6.

Yes, that would be May 6. OK, so we're postponing to May 6. OK. Thank you. We still need to make a motion on this, though, correct, Melanie?

Yes, and if there is any public comment on the postponement request.

Yep, okay, so I have one speaker card on this item, Gary Weipking, or Weipking, Weipking? Okay, he's gonna postpone. All right, is there any other comment from the public before we move back to the board? Okay, seeing none. Anything on tab six for staff? Any questions from the board? If not, we'll entertain a motion.

Motion to approve.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve postponement of the hearing to May 6th. Is there any discussion? All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same. Okay, we will now move into tab six with the Serenoa PD amendment, or sorry, tab eight. Too many numbers today.

Again, for the record, Leslie Regan, Senior Planner with the Office of Planning and Zoning. I will be presenting tab number eight, case number PZ 2025-179, otherwise known as Serenoa PUD amendment. The applicant is requesting to amend and restate the planned unit development Serenoa Ordinance 2019-60 for property identified with Alternative Key 3914076 to allow the use of 120,000 square foot self-storage facility. The subject property is located east of Sawgrass Bay Boulevard, north of Pacific Ace Way and contains approximately 16.64 acres. The subject property is currently designated with a conservation subdivision future land use category within the wellness way boundary and is zoned planned unit development. The concept plan on the screen depicts a four-story self-storage facility that contains 120,000 square feet in area. The facility will not be located directly adjacent to Sawgrass Bay Boulevard but will access the road for entrance to the facility. Staff finds the rezone inconsistent with the land development regulations and comprehensive plan, as self-storage is not a permitted use within the conservation subdivision classification of their future land use. Furthermore, policy 1-8.1.1 of the comprehensive plan lists specific target industries for the non-residential portion of Wellness Way. Self-storage is not a listed use in this policy. The proposed use is also inconsistent with the surrounding area. That area is being developed as the commercial portion of the Serranoa planned unit development, but specifically the uses allowed in there are neighborhood commercial. Self-storage is not a permitted use within the neighborhood commercial zoning. And I'll stand for any questions.

Does anyone have any questions of staff before we hear from the applicant?

I have a question. Mm-hmm. Why was self-storage eliminated from the neighborhood use? That's consistent with county LDRs, correct? So when they incorporated into the PUD, they did not include self-storage specifically?

Self-storage was not included. And self-storage is also not allowed and allowed use within the neighborhood commercial zoning. Thank you.

Are there any other questions for staff before we hear from the applicant?

Just to confirm, you said the surrounding area is neighborhood commercial, so that would apply to what I'm looking at, basically like four out parcels between this proposed and the road.

Yes, that area that you can kind of see here on the screen, those are the neighborhood commercially zoned areas of the Serranoa PUD. Some of those also, I will mention, were part of the Avalon Groves PUD, And there was a policy 1-87.8 in our comprehensive plan that stated the existing, I'm sorry, the existing Avalon Grove's PUD may develop and continue to develop until adoption of a planned unit development, which happened in 2019. At such time, the planned unit development shall address phasing out any Avalon Grove PUD use or other entitlement that's not approved or recognized by the Wellness Way area. Okay, thanks.

Thank you, is there anything else for staff? Okay, we'll hear from the applicant.

Good morning, for the record, McGregor Love, 215 North Eola Drive from Lowndes. I just wanna note that, and the staff report makes this clear, but I wanna reiterate it for this board and for anyone from the public who is here on this item today, that the development we're discussing is what's called vested. It was approved for up to 350,000 square feet of retail commercial C1 uses back in 2012 prior to the adoption of the Wellness Way Plan and the adoption of the designation, the conservation subdivision designation. So we certainly understand that The self-storage facility is not consistent with the conservation subdivision future land use. That is plain. Neither are any of the C-1 uses that could be developed on this property. And what the concept plan shows is that the restrictions that are in place for commercial development, the performance standards, open space requirements, impervious surface area, floor area ratio requirements, this concept plan is consistent with all of those. So a development of this intensity could be permitted by right right now without a public hearing. And when you look at what the conservation subdivision plan is trying to accomplish and what may be the concern amongst folks on this board or folks that live in the area, this is in terms of offsite impacts, self-storage has among the lowest offsite impact compared to any commercial use because of its low traffic generation and the use would be set back behind the developing out parcels so not directly on the right of way. So we know that the owner has had interest in other sort of anchor tenants that again could be developed by right and would place a much a much greater strain on the surrounding roadway network because of the traffic generation. So because of that, we would ask that this self-storage use be allowed within the PUD. I'm here to answer any questions. I have a member from the applicant team who is here as well, and I'll entertain any questions you have.

Does anyone have any questions for the applicant before we hear from the public? I do.

On the concept plan, you said the proposed maximum height of 75 feet. About approximately how many stories is that?

I believe that is six stories.

Six stories tall. Okay.

Thank you. I believe so, yes.

Okay. Is there any other questions for applicant before we move on to hear from the public? Okay. Thank you. You'll have an opportunity to speak again after everybody.

Appreciate it.

Okay, folks, so I have several speaker cards on this item. Just to make everyone aware, we allow three minutes per person in order to give us your information. If you're stating or planning to state something that's already been stated by someone in front of you just to be expeditious, we would appreciate if you would just state, you know, as someone mentioned about height or as someone mentioned about use. That way we can get through this and you don't waste your three minutes regurgitating what somebody else already said. Also, please avoid hollering out from the audience or anything like that. It distracts, it takes us longer to get through things, and then we have more to try to navigate. So if we can try to keep everything respectful, that would be great. All right, we're gonna start with Michael Williams.

Morning, I'm Michael Williams. I live in the Serrano subdivision Adjacent to the proposed property also if you could state your address for the record, please. Okay. My address is one seven seven four four passion flower circle Claremont One of the questions I had was the heights of this storage facility and 75 feet I think was stated that is much higher than anything else in this area. It's nothing but residential We're gonna be faced with a monstrosity In our neighborhood every single day Plus I'm curious about if this is rezoned and That storage what else does that open us up to on the other? areas there the other parcels that the the builder Currently owns because it's my understanding they purchased the whole property I Don't I don't want to see you know like a Well, a gas station being put in there or something like that if that's what by rezoning this would allow someone else to do. That's the aesthetics of this storage facility and what possibly may also be put in there if this is zoned for that is my major's concern. So that's all I have to say, thank you.

Thank you. John Torre or John Tor? Again, if you could state your name and address for the record, please.

Good morning. My name is John Torrey. I live at 17692 Saughall Meadow Avenue. I'm a four-year resident of Serranoa. So I strongly encourage you to reject this rezoning application for the PUD at Sawgrass Bay Boulevard and Pacific Way. For four years, my neighbors and I have been speculating about possible commercial tenants for this property. At no time has anyone said, I sure hope an ugly six-story, 120,000 square foot self-storage facility is built there. If I want to visit a self-storage facility, I can drive two and a half miles from the Serenoa PUD to the new self-storage monstrosity that is almost completed behind the new Chase Bank at Route 27 and Golden Eagle Boulevard. Or I can visit the self-storage facility across the street next to Wawa, or the new self-storage facility being built on Kagan Ridge near Walmart. or the self-storage facility south of Hook Street. The big difference between these self-storage facilities and the Serranoa PUD facility is that the Serranoa rezoning would drop a self-storage facility into the middle of several residential neighborhoods. The staff report raises several valid points against the rezoning, including how the requested use is inconsistent with the future land use category and the proposed self-storage facility is inconsistent with the surrounding area. The aesthetic of the Serenoa PUD self-storage facility should also be considered. There is no such thing as an attractive self-storage facility. It doesn't exist. There is a place for self-storage units in commercial areas like along Route 27. Not all self-storage facilities are successful. If the Saranoa PUD self-storage facility fails as a commercial venture, then you have a six-story white elephant sitting in the middle of several residential neighborhoods. No one in our community is asking for this. It certainly does not match the concept of retail development that was promised to Saranoa homebuyers. For two years, there has been a sign along Sawgrass Bay Boulevard at the PUD that reads Retail Development Coming Soon. I believe Serranoa residents are excited about the compatible commercial properties that will be developed on this PUD, not a six-story pile of concrete. Thank you.

Thank you. Linda McLaurin. I'm sorry, ma'am, you still, you have to come up and state your name and address for the record, and then we're gonna start.

Correct, and that was my point. There was nowhere for me designated back there to go.

Oh, thank you. Thank you.

Welcome to my life. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Linda McLaurin and I live at 17121 Basswood Lane in the Saranoa Village. So I have to read because I made my notes. And I am a resident of the neighborhood. We moved in 2020. So I am here respectfully to oppose the proposed self-storage facility in our residential zone. My concerns are not too abstract because this gentleman luckily talked about aesthetics, but they are backed by documented patterns across the country and right here in the state of Florida. Crime. So self-storage facilities are well-established magnets for criminal activity. Beyond that, these facilities attract vandalism, assault, drug-related incidents, and in some cases, even more serious crimes. Break-ins, theft, vandalism, and other criminal activity have been steadily increasing at self-storage facilities over the last five years. Loitering and drug activity. So these facilities can become targets for a wide range of, like I said, activities including homelessness where people will literally rent out the unit to live there. and also while loitering near the unit, multi-person access to single units at odd hours, all signals of unauthorized use of illicit activities. In one documented case, a fentanyl lab was discovered operating out of a storage unit. And that is, yeah. And then police across the country are warning that self-storage thefts are on the rise. One in Colorado alone, an investigator found out that one person broke into 60 storage units at one time. Let me cross you and then going along with the traffic that many facilities offer 24 hour access, giving criminals more opportunities to operate during off hours. Some criminals have been known to rent units specifically to case the property and identify security weaknesses before striking. That and that kind of foot traffic and vehicle activities does not belong in our neighborhood or any actual neighborhood. Like he said, put it on 27, any other known commercial area. And the oversaturation of things started with dentist's office, but we also do not want oversaturation of storage facilities, neither. There's just not a need for it. But even here in Florida, in Brevard County, a suspect broke two, nearly three dozen units in an extra space storage unit. In Miami-Dade, one victim alone lost nearly 100,000 in collectible property. So in conclusion, very much opposed to it for our safety and matter for our community and for the people around us. Thank you.

Thank you. Tom Vero. If you could please state your name and address for the record.

Yeah, hi, good morning. My name is Tom Vero. I'm at 17820 Passion Flower Circle in Claremont, Florida, 34714. As the other speakers have indicated, I'm also not in favor of the proposal as it's inconsistent with the residential character, the aesthetic, the crime. Also, having a 75-foot height would also maybe set a precedent for the other parcels within that area of saying that, oh, well, If a 75 foot's allowed, maybe an 80 or 100 foot would also be allowed as well. So I feel that it would be inconsistent with residential character and negatively and possibly negatively impact my property values. So I just wanted to pass that along and thank you for your time.

Thank you. Deborah Running.

Yep. Hi, I'm Deborah Running. 4466 Tahoe Circle, Claremont, Florida. I'll make this quick for you. I'm a resident of Sawgrass Bay, which is one of the three communities that are affected by this potential building. From the outside, it might look like three separate neighborhoods, but in reality, we are all neighbors separated by a lot of really beautiful wildlife habitats. And we've all worked together on past issues that affected all of us, such as the Fleming's Road, Sawgrass Bay Boulevard road connection. So the idea of putting a storage facility in the middle of our neighborhood would normally be unthinkable. Who would want that sort of facility in the middle of their neighborhood? I'm quite sure you wouldn't want one in yours. I spent a day handing out flyers to neighbors about this issue and I can say that none of the people I spoke with were in favor of this plan. They pointed out that there are new storage units being built nearby as was already mentioned. One of the residents is a state trooper and he also brought up when was concerned about the possibility of increased crime. We know this parcel is zoned commercial, but shouldn't it be something beneficial to a neighborhood? We don't think a storage unit qualifies. Changing the requirements of the zoning of a PUD needs a very good reason. The bottom line is who does this benefit and who matters more to you? Please recommend against this change to the county commissioners. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Rachel Williams.

Hello, my name's Rachel Williams. I'm a resident at 17447 Saw Palmetto in Serranoa Lakes, Village 3. And I actually wanted to give you guys a map of the area, if that's okay, to show you how residential this is. Would I be able to pass this?

There is a monitor right next to you. Okay. And if you put it down there, it'll show up on our screens. There's like a little camera.

Where the X is. Where the X is, okay.

It'll show up on our screens, and then you can just hand that one copy to the clerk. and we'll be able to keep it for the record. That way you don't have to hand us all copies. And everybody in the audience can see your map then.

So like I said, my name's Rachel Williams. I am a homeowner of one of the 3,300 residential homes that surround Sawgrass Bay Boulevard. And this proposed self-storage facility is almost directly center of all of these residential areas, almost diagonal from our clubhouse. It's not a highway parcel or a commercial corridor. It sits in the middle of where we live, walk, gather, where we raise our children. And we're a very tight-knit community. Like Debbie said, we walk from neighborhood to neighborhood. Our kids ride bikes to the clubhouse pretty much right next to where this self-storage facility will be. We know our neighbors, and we all take a lot of pride in our homes. Students are let off the bus almost directly across from where this facility would be as well. Many of us are willing to pay up to $245 a month in CDD fees, along with HOA fees up to $320 a month. And that's a steep price, but we pay it because we want to invest in the property values of our homes. And we chose this community based on a certain village. So placing a self-storage facility in the center of that community does not align with that vision. We're not anti-growth, we're all the product of growth. But we just want it to make sense, and we want it to work with our community and not against it. It also doesn't make sense when there are roughly 28 storage facilities within a 15-mile radius between Claremont, Davenport, Horizon West, which will be connected to us next year. It certainly does not make sense if this location primarily serves residents of Horizon West because this is proposed as a two minute drive from the Orange County border rather than Lake County residents who already have plenty of access to self-storage facilities. But the most important point is this is not what the community wants. So we all have our various reasons, but ultimately this is going to be in our backyard. And since those zoning signs came up, hundreds of people have emailed, called, we've canvassed over 2,000 houses because we believe that this is not in the best interest of our community. And we even drove today an hour away from our homes to be here. Lots of us here have done so. And I would also like to respectfully address the parcel owner that I understand you have a financial interest, but I really hope you take into consideration what the actual residents who live there that this will be in our backyard, this will be in our line of sight every day want. So thank you guys for your time. And I hope you vote against it.

Thank you.

Let's see.

And if you can just give a copy of the materials to the clerk, that way they have them for our record. Okay, James White.

Hi, I'm James White. I live at 2952 Marlbury Road. Lane in Serino, Claremont. First of all, I like coming up here to Vera, so I didn't mind the drive up. It was great. I love this town. My resistance or my belief that this is really the wrong way to go for us has to do with my prior occupation. I was a special agent supervisor with the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration for 29 years. And I can't tell you the number of meth labs that we found stored in many self-storage facilities around the United States. These meth lab storage are usually, basically they're done to hide the labs until they are activated again. And some of the chemicals that are normally involved in synthesis of methamphetamine include acetone, anhydrous ammonia sulfuric acid, benzene, lithium, red phosphorus, depending on the method, could be cyanide and mercury. These chemicals are highly flammable and highly toxic. And when there's a fire, these toxic fumes go into the air. So my concern, and this happens despite the best efforts of the owner-operator of these self-storage. Obviously, these sorts of activities are prohibited in their contracts. But dope dealers don't care about the rules and regulations that they sign when they rent a place. So that would be my main concern, and so I would be against rezoning this or mini storage. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Keith Bracknell.

Hi, my name is Keith Bracknell. I'm at 17814 Blazing Star Circle in the Palms of Serranoa. I'm opposed to this self-storage unit because it's a thousand feet from my house. It's literally in my backyard and I would be able to see it through the woods. that this storage facility is on the other side of. I don't believe that this is consistent with the aesthetic of the neighborhoods. There's a storage unit at Wawa presently and also on Heartwood Marsh about five miles away. I also believe that This would be disruptive to the wildlife habitat in the area. And I don't think that it's necessary. And what I would want to know is, how do I stop this? How do I stop this? Is it through petition or protest or some other method? That's everything. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. And you're doing exactly what the process gives you the ability to do. Mark O'Halloran. I'm going to hope I got that right. You got it right.

Okay, my name is Mark O'Halloran.

I didn't get it right. You could have just said that. It should be Halloran, not Halloran.

My name's been butchered a million ways. Don't worry about it.

I'm a Smith. I don't get it.

Anyhow, I live at 17861 Blazing Star Circle in the Palms of Serenoa, and I am very much against this development. I'm not going to repeat what other folks have said, but Couple of items I'm concerned about is, A, I live pretty close, like Keith. But my two biggest concerns that haven't been brought up is a negotiation tactic. Let's go in with 75 feet, 60 feet, whatever. And if that's the big gorilla they want to get rid of, we'll go down four stories. I just want to make sure it's the height. Yeah, that's a huge issue, but it's presence. It's so inconsistent with the lifestyle, the view, everything about the area. So anyway, I just want to make sure we're aware of that and also land values. We're getting ready to be connected to orange County and it's financially incentives in Lake County land building. Almost all costs are lower. So there's a strong incentive to grab what you can and build what you can. on the Lake County side. And I just want to make sure that we're all aware of that. There are huge tracks of property that actually are better designed just for this on the Horizon West side that are just as close. They don't need to do that here. The other one is just a precedent set. Sure, now we got this approved, we can put whatever we want, because we're gonna do what we want. And I just wanna make sure that we don't set a really bad precedent for a really beautiful neighborhood. That yeah, we pay over $500 a month, as our privilege to live there. And we're all middle income folks. We're not multimillionaires. We're not billionaires. We are middle income retirees. There's 577 of us homes right there in this neighborhood, right next to where this is proposed. And this is not the dream that most of us have. All right, thank you.

Thank you. Gary Law Kemper. Was I close?

Yeah, you came close.

Gary La camper and I live at a 36, 24 blue Sage loop neighbor with these two guys. And when they put the site map of where this is going to be, I could see their lots from the site map of that seven story facility monstrosity that is proposed for our neighborhood. This is a residential neighborhood, and if you'd look at a Google map from this, you're just gonna see residential houses and wetlands And I worry too about how the wetlands are going to be endangered about this, when one person talked about the meth labs. I know from my own personal experience that we had a storage shed where we lived formerly, and people stored cars in there. Somebody stored batteries in there, which caught fire and destroyed both of our units, everything in it. So these are hazards. in every way that there is. It's not to be made in a residential neighborhood. Like someone else mentioned, we have two units less than three miles away. My biggest concern though is the neighbors. I ride my bike every day down Sawgrass Boulevard and back and I see lots of people walking with their children and their dogs and they walk right past this area. This is not a fit for our community. This is a residential neighborhood with people. Sawgrass Elementary School is one block off of Sawgrass Avenue, and all the traffic going in and out to this facility, people with U-Haul trucks and trailers and all the other negative things about it will be going one block away from this school, which many of these children walk to school. And it's gonna be a big hazard for all the children in that grade school. Closing, I'd just like to say that this facility is not the right fit. I'm not against storage facilities, but it's not the right fit here for our neighborhood, and I ask you to please reject this. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Matt Seba, or Matt Skiba?

Yeah, hello, Matt Siva, 17375 South Palmetto Avenue. I don't have a prepared statement, but I just want to agree with a lot of other comments that people have brought up. Really, I think that 24-7 light pollution is a huge problem, and this is a conservation area. I think that that is a huge issue. That's one of my main concerns. I'm going to go ahead and yield my time. I really don't think you guys should recommend this to go further to the county commissioners. Thank you.

Thank you. Laura Gardner.

Hello, my name is Laura Gardner. I live at 17196 Goldcrest Loop, Claremont, Florida. I just have a few statements. It might not be like a linear, but one of the things I want to mention is over on Hartzog Road on the Orange County side, they have a neighborhood in the Horizon West. They are building a storage facility off of Hartzog Road. So once they do make that connection with Fleming's, you already have one like less than five minutes away. So I don't see the point. Additionally, like others have said, there is the one off 27 by the Wawa and they are building another one right across the street and they're less than eight minutes away. So there's already ample storage within a 10 minute drive. Additionally, also the aesthetic reason. None of the houses are more than two stories tall. So to have a six story tall building, I saw Like they said, it opens it up to crime. It opens it up to transient people just coming in and out of the area. So that, with the children, I don't have a child personally, but I do worry about the children in our area. I worry about the vulnerable people in our area. We have paid the HOA dues. I've paid them since 2020, so I've spent over thousands of dollars. for the beautification of our area. It goes into the CDC, which up keeps all of the grass around the area. So we're financially, we're emotionally invested in this area. Also the conservation land, I don't see a storage facility being a good addition to conservation land. We have a lot of animals walking around. You know, some, we like to see some. We don't, but they're our neighbors. I think of them as our neighbors, so we want to protect them as well. We moved in with the belief that the spaces would be created to foster and create community spaces. A storage facility isn't going to do either of those things. And the ones that are on 27, that makes sense because that's a busy road. There's ample access to those. Once you get to the area that they're looking at, it's a two-lane road, one way in each direction. That is not ample and easily accessible for just random people to come get to their storage facility. So for them as well. So those are the thoughts I have. I hope you can take them into consideration, and I really hope that you oppose this. Thank you. Thank you.

Jenny Suplita or Suplita? Sue or Sa?

Suplita. Okay. Hi, Jenny Suplita, 17359 Saw Palmetto Avenue. My husband and I also live in Serrano Lakes, and we are vehemently opposed to this monstrosity. Everyone has done a great job talking about so many different points, so I'm not going to belabor them. But two points that I do want to say is with that elementary school close by, I do see when I'm driving on the road, small children, even five, six, seven years old, riding their bikes to school by themselves without an adult. So it is a very busy fairway, and there are a lot of young kids around there. And as she had said previously, it is. It's only one lane either direction right outside of that. When my husband and I moved here from Virginia a couple years ago, We went to many different places throughout the county looking for something and we specifically bought in a conservation land area because we did not want high rise buildings going up around us. So that's why we specifically decided to move into that area and decided, okay, we're gonna pay this amount in HOA and CDD fees. And the last thing I wanna say is I'm probably about, what, the 10th, 11th, 12th speaker. So far, not one single person has been up here for this, and I think that that shows immense displeasure with everyone else who's taken the time to drive an hour to come here to tell you guys that we don't want this in our neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you. Cynthia Lepore.

Good morning, my name's Cynthia Lepori. I live at 17375 Saw Palmetto Avenue. As a commercial design director for a global architectural firm, I work professionally with commercial building design, site planning, and how developments integrate with surrounding areas. So I have direct experience seeing what fits and what disrupts residential neighborhoods. I'm here to strongly oppose the proposed rezoning for the self storage facility in this residential area. My family specifically chose this neighborhood because of its proximity to conservation land, which keeps noise, light pollution, and overall disruption low, unlike the heavier, more commercial development coming along Wellness Way and other nearby corridors. As many of my fellow neighbors have mentioned, there are a lot of self storage units already available within extremely close proximity within a few minutes drive. So there's not a need in the neighborhood for any of its residents to actually have another storage facility. I understand from a commercial developer having the desire to purchase land that can be developed on in their interest, which self-storage facility units are inexpensive to build, they're inexpensive to maintain, and theoretically you can have quite a few clients that will come in and have enough income for that investment that they have in the property. I see this as a developer who purchased the property from the previous owner who decided that it was probably in their best interest for time and money to put in the self-storage unit and make a quick buck. It's not actually in the interest of the local residents. In my opinion, local residents would rather see commercial businesses such as coffee shops, wine bars, small retail shops, because this is such a family-oriented neighborhood. We've got the elementary school nearby and we also have the senior community as well as the family residential community so to me another self-storage unit in such close proximity doesn't fit in with the conservation land type neighborhoods nor does it serve the interest of its residents so that's all i have to say thank you thank you

I don't have any other speaker cards. Does anyone else wish to speak on this matter? If so, now would be the time. Okay, if you'd like to come up and just state your name and address for the record.

My name is Thomas Wright, WRJHT. I live at 17120 Basswood Lane, Claremont 34714. I echo everything that was said here today. I just want to point out a couple of things that concern me. A large footprint like that in our area limits an opportunity for economic growth, employment opportunities, and providing a service that we could use in our community. That large structure takes up a big piece of our community, and it only serves one purpose, storage. There is no job opportunity there for residents. It limits economic growth for our community, and it doesn't even comply with the current standards. And one more thing I'd like to add. There would be way more people here today. However, daycare, work, they couldn't do it. But as I speak right now, there are 700 signatures on the electronic petition opposing this development. So I encourage you to take our concerns into consideration and deny this request. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this matter? Yes, ma'am. Please state your name and address for the record.

Hello, my name is Viviana Clanton. I am a resident of Serenoa as well, address 2396 Palm Park Loop. I am opposed to this as well. The reason why I invested into this community is for the foresight and also for the conservation. aspect of it all. Also, as a real estate agent myself, not saying that that's part of this argument, but it is something that I hear what all people purchasing in a community like this are looking for and that definitely something that would affect property values over time uh it's something that would not be in our interest for either current and future residents um i'm opposed to this and um and like he said mentioned earlier there's a lot of people that were not able to be here present due to you know responsibilities and being able to take off work so a lot of us uh that could show up we did show up um and and we're here to represent our community as a whole thank you

Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this matter from the public? Okay, for those two folks that didn't have a speaker card, please make sure you fill one out with the clerk so that she has your information for the record. And sir, we would now welcome anything that you wish to clear up or clarify from those comments.

And once again, for the record, McGregor Love. I just want to say that I appreciate what everyone has said today, everyone that spoke. has again traveled here to voice their concerns, and they've done so respectfully, so I really appreciate the points raised. I understand that there are some aspects of the use that I'm not going to be able to address. There is an opposition to the use on principle, and that is not something that I can change, and don't intend to, but what I will say is that there's a couple of items that were mentioned that I can't address. One is the height. The height under the PUD is 75 feet. So a building that looks exactly like this storage unit could be put on the property without any rezoning or public hearing if it were a different use like an office or other commercial or retail. So again, in asking for the amendment to the PUD, we're not asking for an amendment to any of the performance standards, like maximum height, how intense the use can be. We're only asking for the use itself as a modification. There was also concern about the precedent that this rezoning would set, and as this board knows, and certainly as County Attorney Melanie Marsh knows that the PUD, when you amend it, it's very limited in scope. So if there were another use that one of the out parcels wanted to do, for instance, that isn't allowed under C1, this would not create a precedent that they could go pull permits for that. They would have to come back through this process as well and for it to be reviewed as another PUD amendment, so just want to state for the record that the precedent set by this PUD amendment, if it is approved, would be limited to this particular use. And a couple notes regarding the type of facility that says, and I'm sure that many members of the public know this, there's a distinction between kind of the traditional storage unit, which is a drive up storage unit, It is kind of open air. There's a gate in front and it's kind of a one-story, very wide development. This is not obviously that type of facility that's probably obvious from the fact that it's six stories, but it's entirely enclosed, it's secured, it requires a passcode for entry, and it would have to meet all of the requirements that the county imposes regarding you know, dark sky and light pollution as well. And finally, again, I'll just hit on the issue related to traffic, because that was mentioned, you know, where this is and kind of what the road infrastructure is. You know, we can say confidently that compared to other C1 uses that could go here, that self-storage generates the least amount of traffic. So those are the points that I would mention, and I know that those don't address all the concerns that were raised today, but they are some of the points that I heard raised and wanted to address to this board. Thank you.

All right. Does anyone have any questions for the applicant before we bring it back to staff or the board? No? Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Does anyone have questions or need to speak to staff on any of these matters? Yes, ma'am.

Can I just clarify for you the proposed ordinance for the maximum building height is four stories or 75 feet, whichever is less. So we keep, I've heard six stories, seven stories, but it is capped at four stories or 75 feet, whichever is the lower amount that's in the proposed ordinance.

Correct.

That's correct.

But our current ordinance that controls says 75, but doesn't mention stories. Right.

I don't believe so.

Just 75 is the max?

Okay. So it's not a six-story building. It would be a four-story building.

That's correct. That would be the max. Okay.

Thank you.

I have a question in regards to what we can consider. Economic underutilization, is that something as an advisory board that is under our consideration, or would that be the commissioners?

So all of the criteria that you can consider is listed in your packet. Of course it's consistency with comp plan, LDR, if there's change conditions that justify the rezoning, The extent to which it would result in demands on public facilities, the extent to which it would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment, extent to which it would affect property values, extent to which the rezoning would result in an orderly and logical development pattern, and whether it would conflict with the public interest. So you have to fit whatever evidence you're looking at into one of those categories.

Does anyone have any further questions or discussions for staff?

I have a question for the applicant. You said six-story and our county attorney just clarified four stories or 75 feet, whichever is less. Does this image represent a six-story footprint? And if it does not and you were limited to a four-story, does that also drive a larger footprint for this building to render the same number of square feet?

Yeah, having received that clarification, I apologize for misspeaking on that point, but my understanding is it would be limited to four stories. And the footprint would be the same, but I simply misspoke regarding the number of stories.

Okay, so the footprint is going to remain to produce 120,000 square feet? That's correct. Okay.

Okay. Are there any other questions for staff or the applicant? Okay. Seeing none, I would entertain a motion on the Serona PUD amendment. We can't go into discussion until we've had a motion, just so y'all know.

I move to deny.

I'll second that.

We have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? Does anyone have anything they wish to discuss on this matter amongst the board? Okie dokie. All right. I guess we will move into a vote. All those in favor of denial, signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign?

No.

All right. Motion fail, passes, but yeah, I don't know. The negative passing, I don't know what the proper term is.

Right, so your recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners will be for the Board to deny it, and it was passed by a vote of six to one.

Thank you, ma'am. Okay, thank you. All right, that's the last item on our agenda. Is there any other business? From staff, no other business.

Thank you so much. And our next meeting is on April 1st. Thank you all.

Thank you.