Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Good morning, everyone. We're going to go ahead and get started if you don't mind. We are glad you have joined us for today's meeting. The Municipal Planning Board, or MPB, is an advisory board to City Council comprised of citizen members who voluntarily and without compensation devote their time and talents to a variety of zoning and land development issues in the community. All MPB recommendations are subject to final action by City Council. We anticipate the minutes of today's meeting will be presented at the City Council meeting on July 13, 2026 for approval of recommended actions. Any person desiring to appeal a recommended action of the board should observe the notice regarding appeals below caution and untimely filing by any appellant shall result in automatic denial of this appeal. We encourage members of the public to participate by appearing in person, watching the meeting online or listening by phone and providing live public comment in person or submitting written public comment in advance. Any person. In-person options to participate in the meeting while it is occurring are available at orlando.gov forward slash meetings. If you choose to provide public comment virtually, you must submit any written documents you would like MPB to consider to the recording secretary at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. We'll go through general rules of order. The board is pleased to hear all non-repetitive public comment. Large groups are requested to name a spokesperson. When you are recognized, state your name and address. Direct all of your remarks to the board and limit your comments to three minutes per item or as set during the meeting. Robert's Rules of Order govern the conduct of the meeting. The City of Orlando encourages courteous civil discourse. When acting on items identified with the letters GMP, the Board is acting in its capacity as the local planning agency, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 163.3174 of the Florida Statutes. Items identified with one-star legislative matters or policy-setting actions and are to be conducted according to standard public hearing procedures. Appeals of one-star items must be filed with the City Clerk's Office before 5 p.m. Monday, June 22, 2026 to schedule an appearance before City Council in accordance with Chapter 2, Article 24 of the City Code. Items identified with two stars are quasi-judicial matters or implementing actions and are to be Conducted subject to the Florida Supreme Court ruling in Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County v. Snyder, the Board's decision must be supported by competent, substantial evidence. Persons dissatisfied with the Board recommendation in such matters may be entitled to a de novo or a new hearing before an independent hearing officer in accordance with the provisions of chapter 2 article 32 of the city code a request for a new hearing or an appeal with respect to a two-star item must be filed with the municipal planning board recording secretary by 5 p.m tuesday june 23rd 2026. there is a 500 non-refundable fee for this appeal the mpb recording secretary may be reached at mpb orlando.gov or 407-246-3365 Any person who desires to appeal any decision at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for this purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of proceedings is made that includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is made. Thank you for participating in your government and making Orlando truly the city beautiful.

All right. And with that, we'll open up the meeting with a determination of quorum.

Ryan Sechrist. Present. Terry Reed. Present. Alfredo Barrett. Marcos Bastian.

Present.

Carla Daly.

Present.

Trevor Hall.

Eric Jackson. Present. Julie Kendig-Schrader.

Present.

Yasemin Moreno. We have six members present. We have a quorum.

All right. Thank you. We will call the meeting to order at 9.09 a.m. Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

What do we say to the flag.

Justice.

In accordance with Section 286.0114 Florida Statutes, any member of the public can be heard on any matter before the board today. If the item is listed on the consent agenda, you may ask that the item be pulled and placed on the regular agenda. You may then speak on that item when discussed on the regular agenda. You may complete a speaker request form in advance of the meeting on orlando.gov forward slash public comments or fill out a speaker request form and hand it to the board secretary. Please note participation must be in person. Virtual participation will no longer be accepted. All right, we'll open up with a consideration of the May 19th, 2026 minutes and any motion to waive the reading and approve.

I make a motion to waive the reading of the meeting minutes from the last meeting.

A motion from Board Member Barrett. I'll second. Second from Board Member Bastian. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

All right, that passes unanimously. Thank you.

If the MPB is not adjourned for the day or voted to take an earlier lunch break, the board will complete the agenda item being reviewed as of 1230 PM and we'll pause for a half hour lunch break at the conclusion of that item. Before we get to the consent agenda, I have a couple of announcements. I'd like to remind the board that your financial disclosures are due by July 1st. You can do that online. Please talk to the board secretary if you have any questions on how to access that. And then also we have a new board member, Eric Jackson. Welcome. Happy to have you here. And with that, I will hand it over to Mr. Burton for the consent agenda.

Thank you, Mr chair, we have eight items on the consent agenda, the last two items number seven eight will be pulled for the regular agenda so i'll read off the consent.

We received a speaker request for item number three so that one will also be pulled.

So we'll take those in order number three number seven and eight will be pulled to the regular agenda and i'll read the remainder of the consent agenda.

and Sorry, one more thing we received a speaker request from a diane cologne and it says for data Center but i'm not sure which case that is on the agenda so not a data concern on that person here.

Okay, thank you. I'll read through the consent agenda. Number one on the consent agenda is Rockman Court Abandonment. The applicant is Gregory Crawford. It's Thomas and Hutton Engineering. Owner is Diocese of Orlando. Location is 3715 Edgewater Drive, adjacent to. District is District 3. Project planner is Jim Burnett. This is filed under case number ABN-2026-1. This is the abandonment of the last segment of Rockport. The recommended action is approval of the request subject to conditions in the staff report. Item number two is the first park agricultural use. The applicant is Jim Knopka of First Industrial Realty Trust Inc. The owner is First Park 417 LLC. The location is Southern Terminus of Vista Reserve Boulevard, east of State Road 417, South Lee Vista Boulevard. The district is in District 1. The project planner is Jim Burnett. This is filed under CUP 2026-10006. It's a conditional use permit to allow an agricultural use in the Vista Commerce Park PD. Recommended action is approval of the request subject to conditions in the staff report. Item number three is the parking garage and ground for retail commercial uses on Woodward Street. That's being pulled for regular agenda. number four is the john young parkway warehouse development the applicant is james hoffman of vhb inc owner is blv2 florida 998 north john young parkway llc location is 998 north john young parkway district is district 5 project planner michelle gibbs this is filed under mpl 2026 10023 this is a master plan to allow the development of two new warehouse buildings totally 282,380 square feet. Recommended action is approval of requests, subject conditions, and staff report. Number five is the Gables-Ivanhoe Multifamily Project. The applicant is Megan Dietz of Baker Barrios. The owner is Mustang Orange Grand LLC. The location is 1000 North Orange Avenue in downtown. The district is District 3. Project planner is Sean Elordi. This is filed under MPL 2026-10025. It's a master plan for a seven-story multifamily development with 300 dwelling units. The recommended action is approval of requests subject to conditions in the staff report. Item number six is average truck yard and warehouse expansion. The applicant is Scott Mitchell of Hoyt Bernier LLC. Owner is Average Express Inc. The location is 11125 Palm Bay Drive. District 1, Project Planners Jim Burnett. This is filed under case number MPL-2026-10026. This is a master plan for a phased average truck trailer yard and warehouse expansion. The recommended action is approval of the request subject to conditions in the staff report. As mentioned, items number 7, the Gulfstream Affordable Housing Development, and item number 8, 170 East Washington Street Mixed-Use Power amendment will be pulled for the regular agenda, and that concludes this agenda, Mr. Chair.

All right. Thank you. Before we get to a motion on the consent agenda, does anyone on the board have a conflict to declare?

I do have one last speaker request that came in that I'm not sure which case this is for. It just arrived a moment ago. Tori Simonson, which case here are you speaking about?

um okay so item number eight would number eight okay thank you all right thank you and back to the conflicts i'm seeing seeing none all right with that we'll move to approval or consideration of the consent agenda rather and those items as a reminder are items one through two and four through six any discussion or or motion make a motion to accept

Consent agenda one, two, four, five, and six.

All right. A motion from board member Barrett.

Second the motion.

Second from board member Daley. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. And any opposed? Consent agenda passes unanimously. And with that, we'll move on to our first item. And that would be item number three, parking garage and ground floor retail commercial uses.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Item number three is parking garage and ground floor retail commercial uses. Applicant is Brian Warren of Land Design Inc. The owner is Asian Florida Investment Company Inc. The location is 1212 Woodard Street, and generally located on the south side of Woodward Street, east of North Mills Avenue, west of Shine Avenue, and north of East Colonial Drive, compromising of 0.55 acres. The district is four. The project planner is Michelle Gibbs. This is following the case number MPL-2026-10005. This is a master plan to allow a seven-story parking garage with ground floor retail in the Mills 50 neighborhood.

or area on the recommended action is approval of the request subject to conditions of the staff report and miss michelle will give you an overview of the project right now thank you jason uh michelle gibbs city planning so as jason kind of went through this is mpl 2026 dash one zero zero zero five twelve twelve woodward street the parking garage and ground floor retail and commercial uses um so i can go through this a little bit So the applicant is requesting to demolish the existing one-story building to develop a seven-story parking garage, which includes a ground floor retail and commercial space. The parking garage will provide 349 parking spaces and about 7,200 square feet of ground floor retail and commercial space. This will result, like I said, in the demolition of the one-story existing building located at 1212 Woodward Street and the existing associated parking for that building. The redevelopment site is about 2.86 acres. It currently has a commercial building that's one stories with some mix of uses there. So this will be constructed in a single phase. Like I said before, it'll be about seven stories, but will include the ground floor retail. Supporting site improvements will include the addition of a new trash compactor of the internal vehicular circulation and incorporate additional green space to enhance functionality and aesthetics. The overall project is intended to strengthen the Mills 50 district by improving accessibility, supporting local businesses, and enhancing the urban environment through strategic redevelopment and infrastructure investment. If the request is approved by the board today, the meeting minutes will then proceed on to City Council for approval. Before applying for the permits, the applicant must review and comply with all conditions outlined in the staff report. They will also be subject to an appearance review determination with our urban design staff before they move on to permitting. That will include reviewing additional architecture, elevation details, and design elements of the proposed garage. So here is the subject property. Currently, the multi-tenant one-story building is a little over 10,000 square feet. And like I said, ranges between a mix of uses, so eating and drinking, retail, personal service, indoor rec, and office. From there, you can kind of get an idea of location here. You have two pretty new one-story buildings just alongside it. You have the CVS and then kind of another mix of eating and drinking uses just south of that, fronting East Colonial Drive. So overall, it is consistent with the GMP as well as the LDC. And then for zoning, it is zoned AC1 in traditional city overlay and aircraft noise overlay with a future land use of community activity center, which does allow for parking garages. Additionally, it does meet the setback ISR and building height. And for transportation, I can go through the table. Visually, it might be a little bit easier, but they have to maintain 190 parking spaces on the site for the mix of uses that are there. And it cannot go over a total of 663 parking spaces. Right now, this will be providing 349 parking spaces for the garage. Right now, there are 64 parking spaces, so it will have a total of 430, which stays in the parameters and doesn't exceed the maximum. From there, kind of going into the TIA for the traffic. So the proposed parking garage is intended to provide parking needed for the existing non-residential uses at this commercial area. The traffic memo identified the existing traffic control devices on Colonial Drive and traffic route vehicles. which would use to access and depart the parking garage. While the parking opportunities will increase with the new garage, the traffic memo states a reduction in non-residential uses at 1212 Woodward Street from a little over 10,000 square feet that's currently there, going down to ground floor commercial and retail space of about 7,200. So the PM peak hour trips are shown to also decrease from 176 trips to 133. Okay. And then going through there, I believe most things are kind of addressed, but I can kind of go through any questions that the board may have or the public may have from there. But staff is recommending approval with conditions of the staff report.

I have a quick question. Thanks for the presentation. Is there, just a reminder on what the urban design standards are in that area, is there any requirement for screening or art or panels on a garage building at that scale?

Yeah, they would have to have screening, but I know there would have to be a level of transparency as well. But we'll go through that in the appearance review determination if the applicant kind of goes into a little bit more details on the design. It's kind of preliminary at this time. Okay.

Doug Metzger, All right, thank you, Mr Metzger can describe some of the more specific urban design conditions for the criteria for the parents review.

Doug Metzger, Good morning Doug Metzger chief planner Community planning and urban design studio. Doug Metzger, Section 61 307 on parking garages review and approval requirements all new parking garages shall require master plan review which we're doing today and appearance and transportation official review. design requirements, aesthetics. Parking garages shall reflect the character, scale, and massing of the principal structures they serve. Exterior wall materials for parking garages shall be compatible with the exterior wall materials and finish the principal buildings that they serve. screening. All exposed parking garages shall include a solid opaque wall at least 42 inches high at the exterior of the parking garage levels. This is in the current plans to prevent headlights from shining onto streets or adjacent property. Additional screening elements to soften the severity of the garage podium design may also be required as part of the site plan review. So we have a design that you're looking at today. There's a condition in the staff report that says they have to come back for an appearance review. Prior to going to building permits, it's between now and that appearance review. We'll work on the exterior treatments of the garage. All right.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Any other questions? Would the applicant like to speak on this?

Good morning. Brian Warren with Land Design, 100 South Orange Avenue. Just to say that we have the entire design team here, including the owner, architect, and general contractor, to respond to any public comments or concerns that may be available. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And then we have one speaker request on this. An open public hearing.

Eliza Giuliano. Hello.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for having me. My name is Eliza Giuliano. Do I need a dress and everything? 920 North Shine Avenue, Orlando, Florida. Me and my family walk to this coffee shop about twice every weekend that's in the existing building. My son goes to karate there, so I'm definitely an interested party here. I understand that change happens, and if this change was for the better, I wouldn't be here. I don't think this change is for the better. I consider myself generally a YIMBY. I've been excited about most of the changes in our neighborhood. I argued with my neighbors on Facebook about the Fern Creek Apartments and how it was a wonderful addition to our neighborhood. So I'm not a know-to-everything person. I don't see this as a positive change. Every day I see in our neighborhood more people walking on all the sidewalks. I see people biking within our neighborhood. There are lots of ways to access these businesses besides with a car. I would, you know, I think I understand how the traffic analysis got there. But if we're saying that there's going to be 300 net new parking spaces and no new traffic, that just defies logic. So I think we need a new way of looking at that from a traffic study standpoint. I realize that certain developments are by right, and I think rightly the code is very generous in our area because it is the center of town. It's the center of activity, and that's what I want it to be in the future. I don't think that future involves reliance on most people driving to most destinations. This is a weird project, and I commend staff for figuring out how to deal with weird projects on a regular basis. I'm just not sure our code is set up to handle this one. I would argue that the Mills Colonial Strategic Plan, that this is not what it envisions. What I saw was housing supported by parking, not a parking garage that sticks up. five times the height of all the buildings around it with no future in which I foresee that there's going to be other buildings masking that. I think we have great standards for parking garages to get them to blend in with what's around it, but it's hard to blend in when you're a seven-story building surrounded by one-story buildings. And If we have to say yes to this, I would commend you to empower staff as much as possible to work on that urban design, not to make it blend in maybe, but to think of it as it's going to be the tallest thing around. So maybe it's got to be an art piece or something, but it's going to be very, very visible. And again, visibility isn't a bad thing, but parking is not what I think of as the most important thing in my district. I would also note that the bike parking on the rest of the site is somewhat deficient. The most recent bike parking installed behind Corey is installed too close together, so you literally can't fit the number of bikes that are supposed to be there. And then other bike parking is insecure. Basically, you could take a hammer and take it apart. So I don't know the details of how you deal with that when it's the same owner building something new on the site. But my argument would be if they can afford to spend $10 million on a parking garage, that they can probably afford to fix the bike parking on the site. So with that, I mean, I hope that you will find a way to say no to this. But if you can't, please, please focus on the aesthetics of the garage as well as the deficiencies in the bike parking. Thank you.

Thank you. Right. With that, would the applicant like to follow up with anything?

Yes, I believe the general contractor is coming up to speak. Thank you.

I'm David Lamb with Lamb and Company Partners, 968 Lake Baldwin Lane, Orlando, Florida. I'm just going to make this brief. The owners here, and we've been working with staff on the pedestrian realm for this project in that north face. Right now it is non-contributory, and we've expanded the sidewalk area, taken away a couple of the, or several of the parallel parks to create space a very nice pedestrian realm along the whole north elevation, which is the pedestrian shed to and from these areas. And we're now creating less retail frontage than we had before. So that was the biggest issue is that that area is parking deficient. And so right now there's parking that has been leased in some other lots. There's parking all through the streets at night. And what we're trying to do is consolidate that in position in the neighborhood with the parallel, all the parking in the street and not bother the neighbors so that we have a place to consolidate it. That section that has really come back to life and right now that whole corridor has underserved for centralized parking. So this is a great opportunity for the city to get a node of parking consolidated in one place. It is going to have surplus spaces that will be open to the public. uh there will be a ticket piece at one point up in the garage but my point is is that ann is very much wants to share the neighborhood to be able to use this parking garage as well it's not just for her but is for anybody who needs parking and especially in the peak times i'll answer any questions that you may have thank you commissioners any questions from the board for the applicant

All right. Yeah. Oh, sorry.

I was just wondering, and I don't know if this is the applicant or the staff. What are the plans like which which businesses in which areas will this exit this parking serve? And then are there any plans for pedestrian connectivity? in the area. So if people go to the centralized parking garage and then walk to the adjacent areas, is there anything in place or planned for that?

First off, this particular property owner owns the entire block with the exception of the CVS on the corner. And also, Michelle will tell you, what we suggested as staff is to improve the streetscape in front of the garage because there'll be ground floor level retail with the potential for al fresco and outdoor dining. So they'll be putting in a formal streetscape on the north side. However, the parking lot access that exists today, since there have been improvements to two of the buildings that are on the block are somewhat in place already, as well as the sidewalks. They're not perfect sidewalks, but there are sidewalks that are surrounding property. Of note, as things redevelop on Mills Avenue, the staff has started to create a standard of making sure that there's a minimum of a 10 foot with easements streetscape corridor along the street so that we can go through and expand the streetscape in the future.

So basically, it's under common ownership, the entire block. And would there be shared parking agreements amongst the properties? I understand it's under common ownership, but it may not always be. Or is this just going to be where it'll be a public parking lot? And then if those corner properties are sold, they they can just park and pay, the customers can.

Yeah. I can speak to that a little bit more. So I did pull up the site plan. So as Jason kind of discussed, all of these properties except for the CVS is owned by the same owner. They actually don't currently have enough space on the site. So now they have a parking determination right now, kind of catty corner, 1510 East Colonial for about 54 parking spaces, leasing those mainly for employees. So the hope is that they won't need that anymore and they can actually use this site for all of the parking needs. The building that's kind of fronting is East Colonial is a majority eating and drinking, which is a higher parking ratio, five per thousand. And the new one story is a mix, but it is a lot of also eating and drinking. So they do require a little bit more parking. But the hope is that. they can do that using this parking garage the surface parking um kind of located here will remain so that's 64 parking spaces um but kind of as david said there will be an additional uh amount of parking for the surrounding uses on mills and colonial no thank you that's very helpful context board member basher thank you um

Could we go to page 45 of the report where it shows the elevation? Next one. There. So I understand, Jason, what you're talking about having additional space for outdoor dining. It does not appear to me that there will be enough space for any meaningful space outside, outdoor space and that. I think that this application would benefit tremendously from additional urban design beyond just urban furniture and a few trees. It actually deserves to have a full volume of the base of this garage properly designed. I think it would have helped you, the applicant, tremendously if you had that already. It would help our decision. I understand this might be too early, but that's my only comment that you heard that the concern of Ms. Harris here was the height, but also what's going to do to the pedestrian environment in that area.

It's hard to see in this elevation, but the whole ground floor, other than that one entry to the right, is all retail with transparency.

I can see that. I can see that, except that it still does not... does not seem to be designed as a retail space. It's just a bay underneath it.

We have 15 to 20 feet now. We're actually undergrounding the power lines along this frontage edge to get rid of that unsightly overhead lines that are run through there. We have 15 to 20 feet now with taking back the parallel parks on the street out front. We grab that back. You're right. This rendering is an undeveloped hardscape streetscape. The internal streetscape throughout the plan is nice pavers. It's a nice pedestrian shed all the way to the retailers that are the restaurants that are on the colonial face. So we intend to accentuate this as the lead into the project and make that nice and Your concerns are noted. We will definitely make this a friendly, maybe covered awning, maybe benches, fixed benches that'll be there so that people can see, even though it may have tables with umbrellas or something or whatever. But you're right.

Is the storefront, the glass of the storefront flat, you know, flushed with the face of the garage or do you have a recess underneath it?

I think it's pretty close.

it may be a foot or two recess but it's not you don't have any additional uh covert seating space underneath that pretty much that's correct thank you that's it thank you any additional questions for the applicant from the board before we close public hearing all right seeing none we'll close public hearing and bring it back to the board for a discussion or consideration of a motion

I'll move approval subject to the staff conditions contained in the report.

Motion for approval from board member Kendrick Schrader. Any second?

Second the motion.

But second from board member Barrett. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And item three passes unanimously. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. On to item number seven. This is the Gulfstream Affordable Housing Development. The applicant is Michael Kearns of AFCOM Inc. The owner is School Board of Orange County, Florida. Location is 2510 Gulfstream Road and generally located on the south side of Gulfstream Road, west of Canal Lane, north of Cross Street, and east of Marathon Avenue. consisting of 8.55 acres the district is district six the project planner is calandra jones this is filed under case number z o n 20 26 1 0 0 0 3 this is a straight rezoning from r1a to r3a for an affordable housing project of 100 units recommended action is approval to request subject conditions the staff report and calandra jones will present for us okay

Good morning, Mr. Chair and board members. I am Kalandra Jones, the project planner for the 2510 Gulfstream Road rezoning. So the project location is 2510 Gulfstream Road is located south of Gulfstream Road, east of Marathon Avenue, north of Cross Street and west of Canal Lane. And you also see that is north of L.B. McLeod Road and I-4. It is approximately 8.55 acres located in District 6. So the requested action today is a rezoning from R1A to R3A, and it's to accommodate 100-unit affordable housing development. The property is currently vacant, and it was previously developed with school buildings for Orange County Public Schools. If approved, this request would change the maximum allowable density on the site from 5.7 dwelling units an acre to 12 dwelling units an acre. The surrounding property conditions, as you can see from the north, there is residential uses, single family. Also to the south is single family and multifamily. You have to the east, public recreational institutional, which is both the Catalina Elementary School and Memorial Middle School. And to the west, you have a residential medium intensity of R3B, which is also a multifamily development. And also to note that those multifamily developments that are currently in areas, Catalina Owls Apartments, currently have 88 units on 4.09 acres, which would yield a 21% Dwelling units in acre density and Governor's Manor has 120 units on its site on 6.79 acres, which would yield 17 dwelling units an acre. And the development that is before you today is requesting 12 dwelling units in acres. So you'll see the comparison for those. So here's an area of the site you can see the site is currently vacant and then you see to the north and to the West you see a multifamily excuse me, you see residential of single-family you see to the to the East you have the school buildings then you also have to the North. The Northeast you have clear Lake Park to the South you also have some more single-family and the multifamily and to the West as well. So consistency with the growth method management plan, the subject property is currently designated as residential low intensity on the city's future land use map and objective l you 2.3 and policy l you l you point to point 3.1 provide standards relating to those developments outside of the activity centers and mixed use corridors. So just to say something in regards to the residential low intensity future land use designation and comparing it to the residential medium. So you see the map, the site is currently residential low and it will continue to be residential low. And you see also the residential medium that's to the south and west of the property. Those are the Catalina Isle Apartments and the Governor's Manor Apartments. So the comparison between the residential low, the maximum density is 12 dwelling units an acre. The residential medium intensity has a minimum density of 12 dwelling units an acre with a maximum of 30 dwelling units an acre. And also you see the allowable uses are the same with residential and public recreational institutional. In the comparison to the zoning as well, the existing zoning is R1A, also has a future land use designation of residential low intensity, and the proposed zoning R3A does have the same future land use designation as well. The difference between the two is the density. And as I stated previously, the maximum density for R1A is 5.7 dwelling units an acre, and for this one is 12 dwelling units an acre. And if we do the math in regards to the acreage of the 8.55 acres at 5.7 dwelling units an acre, it yields 48 dwelling units. And if we do the R3A with the same acreage with the 12 dwelling units an acre, we yield 102 dwelling units. So that's a difference of 54 dwelling units altogether. The impervious surface ratio will remain the same at, no, excuse me, I'm sorry, it's 55% for R1A and 60% at R3A, but the maximum building height will remain the same at 35 feet. Here's a comparison of the zoning maps. We have the existing to the left and the proposed to the right. And a few site photos, as I stated previously, the site is currently vacant. There's also a lift station on the site. It's lift station 28, which will remain on the site as well. A few neighborhood photos. We have single-family residential to the north of the site, multifamily to the southwest of the site, and the Kalalina Elementary School east of the site. So the rezoning map amendment, the staff report provides informational comments from staff for future development when a master plan is submitted for review. Currently, there is no site plan available right now for this request. So an administrative master plan would be required prior to building permits due to the fact that they are proposing 100 dwelling units or fewer. So the next steps in regards to this is that the many minutes of this board will go to city council and then we will forward our rezoning request to the city attorney's office and we have the first and second reading of the rezoning ordinance and it will become effective upon adoption and then there will be a master plan review for the case. So we do recommend approval of case ZON 2026-10003. And I am available for any questions you may have.

All right. Thank you very much. Any questions from the board to staff at this moment before we open up public hearing? Let's see, Board Member Bastian.

Just want to confirm, even though it's not specified here, at least I didn't see, I'm assuming it's going to remain as two stores, right? Because that's a 35.

It could go to three stores.

Three stores?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Thank you.

Any additional questions? Former Barrett?

So, Colandra, in your report for the school, so OCPS has to approve this as well too?

Yes, this is their property. So they would have say in this as well. Yes.

Any additional questions? Sorry, we'll open up public hearing soon. And if you'd like to speak, if you haven't already, you can file a request to speak with the board secretary. And we'll open up public hearing. And you can ask a question. All right. Before we open a public hearing, can we ask if the applicant would like to speak on the case?

Good morning. Mike DeFuto, AFCON, filling in for Mike Hearns. He's currently on a cruise. AFCON 436 East New York Avenue, DeLand. Just a couple items. Just want to remind board members that this is an OCPS project. They are the applicant and they approve this for going forward with housing for their employees and public service employees as well. So besides that, I'm here for questions. Other than that, I don't have anything else to add.

Any questions for the applicant at this time? All right, seeing none, we will open up the public hearing and ask for the first speaker. Thank you.

All right, so since we have quite a few speakers here, I'm going to list the first three names so that you can get yourself ready to come over. When the first person gets done speaking, I'll call the next three, even though it's going to be kind of an overlap. That way you can sort of get yourself ready to come up and speak. So the first person, these all were received in order that they received for us is Terry Walker. And then Sabrina Morse and Ronan Sartana. We have Terry Walker. Sabrina Morse.

No.

Then Ronan Sartana, come on up. And after him will be Susan Garcia and Rose Gardner, if they're here.

Ronan Sartana, 2801 Gulfstream Court. Lived on Clear Lake for six years. My wife and two kids are watching right now. Love you guys very much. They would love to be here. I just don't want three-year-old running around. I go walking down Gulfstream Road every day, walking my dog, kid on his bike. There's a really nice family that lives in 2704 Gulfstream Road. It's their home. It's a single family home, house. The staff report doesn't mention that. The apartment building... The multifamily apartment complex is behind two fences directly to the west of what you're voting on is single family home. They're not here right now, but I want to make sure on the record that that's known directly to the west. It is it is our one house. All the houses across the street are residential. If you look at the staff report. zero feedback from the neighborhood that it's impacting prior to today's session, zero HRA meetings that they actually brought this to us beforehand. Basically from our perspective, all the critical studies have been deferred. And I understand you wanna wait for the master plan before you have the studies completed, but under the MPB review, the environmental assessment that does fall under what you guys are supposed to decide whether the rezoning and the land in question, the intensity of the density can meet the land in question. And according to the staff report, that was waived, not because it is part of the laws to waive it. It was waived under the pretense that it used to be a school and there's no vegetation on the site. the lake is part of the environment. The lot that you're looking to put 100 unit apartment complex on is on a lake. Five of the lakes in the watershed are already polluted with the exact same thing that comes from eight acres of concrete, fertilizer and runoff. approving on condition uh contingencies means that you can affect how the house or how the building gets built you can't unrezone the land per the density and the staff report does not take into account the environmental impact and and it really is upsetting this lake we poured our livelihood into the lake at one point our wife and i had $4,000 off your bank account to live on the lake. To think that this massive apartment complex in the heart of a residential neighborhood is gonna go up and the city didn't even follow your own requirements to look how it's gonna impact the environment. There's a lake, there's a park, people live here. I personally really think that we deserve to have the proper process. We deserve to have a say in this. I think unanimously, a lot of people are going to give really good points, but I would love to hear from you guys. Why was the environmental assessment deferred or waived altogether?

Thank you, thank you.

This is a public hearing, can you please save your applause me to get through this efficiently. i'll answer the question and environmental assessment is only done on raw land that's never been developed before to see what natural systems were to go for tourists is or. or a wetlands that are on the property and it wouldn't be relevant relevant on a previously developed piece of property.

My understanding is an assessment of the environment means that a lake in the neighborhood in which the 100-unit apartment complex is being built should be taken into consideration.

That's the answer. That's the requirement. If it was raw land, then an environmental system would have been done.

I understand. I understand. If you don't mind, I'm not trying to debate. I'm not trying to debate. Please, guys, there's so many families here. regardless of the legitimacy of this proposal or not, please take into account the environment. This lake is special. It's the hidden gem of Orlando. People genuinely love this lake. It's a public lake. the most fun experience i've had have been fishing on this lake please like i i implore you please and that's all either a lot of people i want to speak do you guys i don't understand thank you no we uh we'll record comments that you've made and staff will get a chance to approach at the end and then we can ask questions of the staff based on the testimony that you've provided thank you thank you

So next up would be Susan Garcia and I misspoke earlier it's Ross Gardner and then Thomas Crane.

Good Tuesday morning. My name is Susan Garcia and I have lived in the Isle of Catalina neighborhood at 2716 Seabreeze Court since 2010. I served on the IL Catalina HOA board as both secretary and president since 2019, and currently serve as the neighborhood watch coordinator. During my years of service, I have worked closely with many residents, city of Orlando County, commissioners, including Commissioner Burns, Commissioner Scott, Orlando Police Department, Chief Smith, Sergeant Warren and Corporal Rogers, as well as community partners such as City of Orlando Neighborhood Relations Team to improve communication, strengthen neighborhood engagement and to help residents stay informed about issues affecting our community. I am not here this morning to say that growth or development should never happen. I understand that communities evolve and that responsible development can bring benefits. However, responsible development requires transparency, communication, and trust between the community, the property owner, the developer, and the city. In early 2025, I was contacted by Dr. Bridget Williams regarding the future of the former school property within the Isle of Catalina unit one development. At that time, We were told that the project was likely years away and that the community would have a seat at the table and as plans progressed. Based on those conversations, I believed there would be ongoing communication and opportunities of meaningful community input before our major decisions were made. I shared these beliefs in my communication with neighbors. I feel deceived and hurt at this point. Unfortunately, many residents learned about this recording hearing only after I noticed a small eight and a half by 11 public notice posted near the property. And I sent out communication of this hearing to my neighbors, my neighborhood watch members. For many of us, that was the first indication that this project had advanced to this stage. As a result, many residents feel that they have not yet had a clear understanding of this proposed development, its long impacts, and details of the affordable housing program being proposed. We still have important questions regarding long-term affordability commitments, traffic impacts, stormwater management, community compatibility, and the overall vision of how this development will integrate with the existing neighborhood. These are not minor details. They are important considerations for residents who will alongside this development for decades to come. As Siplin states on the Wendover Group website, this early outreach helps identify and address concerns before the project begins, building trust and smoothing approvals. We have to be proactive, not reactive. Therefore, I respectfully request that the board consider delaying action on this rezoning application until the community has had an opportunity to receive additional information. Thank you for your time.

Please refrain from applause during the middle. We'd like to get through everyone's items in a timely manner.

Okay, Ross Gardner. Is there a Ross Gardner here? No. Thomas Crane. After him, Daniel Garcia and Brenda Martin-Smith.

Good morning. I'm Thomas Crane. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak today. I've been a resident of Isle Catalina for 26 years. I live in an 1850 foot square house by myself. I'm the guy that picks up all the Popeyes wrappers and chicken stuff and trash that people throw on Gulfstream Road. I don't think the lady that just spoke or is in charge of the zoning lives in the Isle of Catalina. So again, it's not her issue, it's my issue. If you look at the crime coming from Governor's Manor and the other place out front near L.B. McLeod near the highway, that's where it all originates from. My house has been robbed three times since I've been there in 26 years, yet I've remained there. I've got bars on my windows now. How much is enough? Here's the new apartments that have gone in in the last 10 years, just in Millennium Mall area, right near me, which impacts the traffic, the crime, the noise, and the environment. Millennia Park, 960 units. M North Apartments, 266 units. Millennia, 700 apartments. Estates at Millennia, 403 apartments. The Addison, District West at the parking. Altair at Millennia. Fountains at Millennia. The Grove, Wood Partners. How much is enough? This is a single family residential neighborhood. People put their life and their blood and their guts in here. We pay taxes. All we've seen is our taxes go up 20%. There are allegations of misuse with Orange County and the city of Orlando. And I'm pissed off. I had to pay $60 to have my green yard waste removed because they said the pile was too big. And it wasn't as big as it was in the hurricanes. So I've seen the level of service go downhill. My house has been robbed. with the very basic things we don't have. And you're telling me that this is a low-income, 100-unit building going to go right down the street from my house. I respectfully ask that you reject this application, and I'm pissed off. Thank you for hearing.

Thank you.

Daniel Garcia, Brenda Martin-Smith, and Eben Spalding.

Good morning. My name is Daniel Gracia. I'm going to take it a little bit easier on you guys than this guy did, but I live at 2716 Seabreeze Court in the Isla Catalina community. I currently serve as the chair of the Isla Catalina Waterways Committee and president of Clear Lakes Foundation. a nonprofit organization focused on protecting and improving our lakes, canals, and waterways. For the past several years, I have worked alongside neighbors, volunteers, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission partners, and local agencies to address water quality concerns, canal maintenance, vegetation management, and also environmental stewardship. Sorry about that.

Gosh.

environmental stewardship on Clare Lake and canals throughout the neighborhood. Today, I am not here to debate whether affordable housing is good or bad. I am here because any significant development adjacent to Clare Lakes and our canal systems should be evaluated carefully and transparently before major zoning decisions are made. Our neighborhood is unique. We are not simply subdivision. We are a water front community connected to Claire Lake by seven canal systems. One of those canal systems ultimately connects to Shingle Creek Watershed, which flows southward towards the Florida Everglades. What happens on this property has the potential to affect drainage patterns, stormwater runoff, water quality, and long-term health of these waterways. Residents still have questions regarding storm water management, environmental impacts, watershed protections, and how increased density may affect the clear lake and surrounding a canal system. As someone who works directly with residents on water related issues, I believe these questions deserve clear answers before the community is asked to accept such significant change. I am also concerned that many residents have. only recently become aware of how this proposal had progressed, regardless of where people stand on the project itself, meaningful community engagement should occur before major decisions are made. Therefore, I respectfully ask the board to consider delaying action on the rezoning requests until additional information can be provided regarding environmental impacts, infrastructures considerations, and community concerns. A short delay would only allow uh residents developers orange county school board and city staff an opportunity to engage in productive discussions and ensure that the future decisions made with the benefit of of complete information thank you for your time and consideration any questions sir thank you thank you very much okay we have uh brenda martin smith abin spalding elena de bernardus

Hello. Thank you. My name is is Dr. Brenda Martin-Smith. I live at 3409 Gulfstream Road. In 1977, I spent my first night as a married Roman at the Catalina Inn Sheridan Hotel. Since that time, I've seen that hotel go to affordable housing where the Orlando police was called frequently. I've seen that hotel become a swingers hotel where the Catalina, where the Orlando police was called sometime. I have seen in 1977 the Franciscan apartments, which are on the corner of 29th Street and Rio Grande. They were beautiful apartments where the same people they're talking about building this affordable housing for. You had nurses, you had teachers, you had firemen, you had up and coming people. They also lived in Governor's Manor. They lived in the Carlton Arms, which was right down the street. They lived in lemon tree condominiums. They lived on hunters apartments where you had fireplaces. These were beautiful places. Since then, all of those places are now quote unquote affordable housing. Since then, I'm on Ring. So I get all of the police reports, the burglaries, the robberies, the shootings, the killings, the kidnappings. I am informed that I built my house in 1984 in the Isle of Catalina, because like I told you, I fell in love with it. in 1977. I am a native Floridian born and raised in Winter Park on the west side, and we're going through the exact same things over there. But in 1984, I built my house on the canal. Isle of Catalina is one of the best kept secrets in this whole city. We, we live We live in a housing development that if we were in any other zip code other than 32805, we would not have to be fighting for our properties to be worth the value that it is. I live on the canal at the end. In 1984, my kids could swim in that water. It was clear. You could see all the way down. With each improvement at our stadium, which is known to me as the citrus bowl because that's how old I am. We have gotten run off. I now rake my canal like I rake my backyard. I now have to have aerators in my canal. So I ask you, please, like Matthew and John, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If you don't want this in your neighborhood, please, please, please, please don't put it in mine. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

OK. Eben Spalding, Elena De Bernardis, and Jimmy Huckaby.

Good morning. My name is Eben Spaulding. I'm a resident of the Isle of Catalina neighborhood, and I live at 2604 Windward Court. I'm also a licensed civil and environmental engineer specializing in land development and water and wastewater infrastructure design. My Florida PE license number is 91043. My statements this morning are my own and not a reflection of my employer. I'm here in opposition of the proposed rezoning. My concern this morning is what the staff report itself Uh, and and it's findings for in the in the recommendation of approval. The staff reports finding section on page 11. States that the proposed rezoning will be compatible with the surrounding land uses and the general character of the area. That is one of the key findings being used to support approval and it is a requirement that must be met to rezone under the city's land development code. But on page one, sorry, on table one of page four of the staff report, which describes the surrounding property land use and zoning, it identifies the property immediately west as R3B. That is misleading and factually incorrect. The property immediately west of the subject site along Gulfstream Road is single family residential R1A, not R3B. This is not a minor typo. It's a mischaracterization of the surrounding area. This distinction matters because the compatibility with the surrounding area is central to the recommendation of approval. The subject parcel is currently R1A. The property immediately west on Gulfstream Road is R1A. The entire neighborhood to the north is R1A. And most of the southern property line abuts R1A. But the staff report makes the west side appear more intensive than it actually is. If the staff report does not accurately describe the surrounding neighborhood, then I do not see how the board can reasonably rely on the same report to conclude that the rezoning is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. So before the board recommends approval, the staff report must be revised and accurately identify the surrounding land uses and zoning. It also needs to clearly explain how this rezoning is compatible with the actual surrounding neighborhood, not a mischaracterization of it. the public should also have a fair opportunity to review and respond to that corrected analysis. For those reasons, I respectfully ask that the rezoning not be approved this morning. At a minimum, the item should be continued until the staff report is corrected and the public has had time to review it. Thank you.

Thank you. Elena DeBernardis, Jimmy Huckabee, Janine Pardee.

Good morning, members. My name is Elena Di Bernardis and I live at 2501 Windward Court in the Isle of Catalina. My husband and I have lived here since 2007. After renting for two years, we committed our lifelong savings to buying our first family home together. We fell in love not only with the unique and beautiful spring fed Clear Lake, but with a diverse and tight knit community that is the Isle of Catalina. Many residents who have lived here for more than 50 years. Over the last 19 years, we faced serious challenges, including spikes in violent crime, detrimental flooding from impacts from hurricanes. Still, we've stayed and invested, renovating, updating and maintaining our home because this neighborhood is more than a zip code. It is our home. That's why we are alarmed to be here today. Orlando is considering a rezoning request from R1A to R3A in our neighborhood. R1A zoning laws were put in place to protect and maintain single family home communities. Yet the stated purpose of this rezoning is to accommodate an affordable multi-unit housing development. I want to be very clear. I support affordable housing, and I believe people deserve safe, dignified places to live. But Orlando also has to be fair and responsible about where housing is placed, how it is approved, and what impacts it brings. As of today, our zip code already has the highest concentration of affordable multifamily housing in the entire city, with over 400 developments. Adding more through R1A to R3A will further concentrate pressure on one community that has already carried a disproportionate share. So we asked the council to explain why is this rezoning being proposed in the Isle of Catalina specifically? And why is it being pursued through R1A to R3A rather than following the appropriate process for development of this intensity? We also strongly question the process and impacts. This rezoning relates to land our neighborhood donated in good faith to the school board for the purpose of building a school. Yet now we are being asked to approve major zoning changes without the deferred lake traffic and environmental studies typically required to development at this scale. We deserve answers about why this rezoning hearing is moving forward without those safeguards and why the school board and the owners of the gifted land didn't address zoning earlier, especially when the land for Catalina Elementary was acquired. In closing, I respectfully ask this council to treat their decision as if this was happening in your own neighborhood. please vote against the R1A to R3A rezoning request and require a process that includes the proper studies and meaningful protections for its residents. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Jimmy Huckabee, Janine Pardee, James Coward.

I apologize, I've never done this before, but my good friend and neighbor over there, Darville Davis, had written something up. He's not speaking. He asked if I could hand these to him. Is that possible?

And if you could state your name and address for the record. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Jimmy Huckabee. My address is 2511 Catalina Drive. And I've been a resident of the Isle of Catalina for 35 years, more than half of our community's rich 67-year history here in Orlando. The Isle of Catalina is a unique neighborhood. Established in the late 50s, canals were created from Clear Lake to form a community of predominantly waterfront homes. Generations of families have lived, worked, and raised their children here. When I moved to the neighborhood in 1991, an Orlando Sentinel article highlighted Isle of Catalina as one of only two truly integrated neighborhoods in Orlando at the time. I was proud to become a part of this community and remain proud of its special place in Orlando's history. The property being considered for rezoning was formerly our neighborhood elementary school. Several years ago, a new school was built on adjacent property, and the original school was demolished. Throughout the many decades that the school operated on this site, the property remained zoned R1. That zoning was established for a reason, to preserve the character and integrity of the surrounding low-density residential neighborhoods. While there is R3 zoning nearby, it is separated from our neighborhood by walls, fences, and different traffic access patterns. Those properties access exclusively from LB McLeod Road. This proposed development would be fundamentally different. It would become an immediate neighbor to our community with direct access from within the Isle of Catalina itself. This proposal would introduce an estimated minimum 100 resident units adjacent to neighborhoods of 386 homes. And in addition, the neighboring communities across Clear Lake contain approximately 276 homes, which are all zoned R1. Together, more than 660 homeowners would be affected by a significant change in the character and density of this area. The Isle of Catalina was originally planned to develop as a low-density residential community. Rezoning this property to allow substantial greater density would represent major departure from the vision and would have lasting impact on the character, traffic patterns, and overall stability of the neighborhood. Maintaining the current zoning preserves the expectation of existing residents and remains consistent with the original planning and development of this community. I respectfully ask the board to consider the concerns of the residents who have invested their lives, family, and future in the neighborhood and deny the request to rezone this property to high density residential use. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Janine Pardee, James Coward, Kyle Twardowski.

My name is Janine Pardee, and I live at 2513 Catalina Drive, about 120 feet or one, no, not 120, about 320 feet from this site and about a football field away on the lake. And I've lived there for approximately 35 years. First, I want to say that I don't think the original sale of this property to the school board was without limitations. It was limited by the developer, Gerald Gay, the owner of Catalina Corporation. He put restrictions on what could be done with this property. He sold it to the school board with the proviso that it be used for a school. So I think that any other use that is not the original, he could have developed it as single family homes, but he made a deal with the school board in order to induce them to place an elementary school within the Isle of Catalina. So I think that there are probably some contractual documents that need to be examined before you approve any zoning change. So that brings me to the fact that this is entirely inconsistent with the Isle of Catalina. This property is fronts on the neighborhood. Please don't vote for this unless you have driven through there and can see the character of the neighborhood and where this location is. It looks like it's nestled amidst other R3 developments, but it is not. Those developments front on L.B. McLeod Road. So it is entirely inconsistent with our neighborhood and will drastically affect our property values. Affordable housing when it's placed in blighted areas, can bring up property values. But when it's placed in a middle income, or in this case, it's an upwardly mobile neighborhood. We've had, I don't know, at least three world champion wakeboarders, young people move into the neighborhood in the past 10 or 15 years. Those are young couples uh in moving into a very mixed neighborhood so you can improve you put put affordable housing in an area that needs it this area does not need it and it it will destroy our property values And that, you know, check the United States and check the figures on that. There are affordable housing areas nearby. Someone pointed out the one up at Gulfstream and Rio Grande, and that one has been refurbished four times since I've lived there. It keeps getting destroyed, lots of crime up in that area, and yet we still have resisted that and improved our neighborhood and have young people moving in. I question the report. I don't think that all of the statements there are accurate. So thank you very much for hearing me, and I hope you vote against this rezoning.

Thank you.

Thank you.

James Coward, Kyle Twardoski, Gerald Galt.

Good morning, Board. My name is James Bradley Coward, and I'm a resident at Isle of Catalina. I've also been president of the Homeowners Association there. All of my points have been made by previous speakers, so I won't waste your time this morning. But I truly, truly ask you to think about this and make a wise decision, because this isn't for our neighborhood. Like Janine said, this should, if it were to be there, it would open up to L.B. McLeod, not directly in our neighborhood. There's only two streets that are out of our neighborhood that could service these new properties. So thank you for your time and your consideration. Thank you.

Thank you. Kyle Twardowski, Gerald Galtz, Rudy Johnson.

Connect to USB to show some exhibits.

No virus at all there. No, no.

Get me in trouble if there is.

Which one? That's it right there. Yeah, the traffic map.

We.

All right, good morning. I'm a resident. My name is Kyle Twardoski, 3017 Tradewinds Trail, Isle of Catalina. I would like to show you an exhibit here that I got up. It's a little map that shows the traffic patterns in the neighborhood in relation to where the subject property is. What Calandra's report fails to show you is uh is the broader picture of the neighborhood everywhere that i have highlighted green is r1 a single family home residence uh the property in red is the you know the subject property i have put arrows of all the direct entries and exits you know for that property the r3a zoning that's adjacent to the property does not enter our property at all there are no streets that go north west or east out of that property into the isle catalina neighborhood uh There are children that walk the streets. A lot of the streets only have single sidewalks on one side of the street, no sidewalks on the other. With affordable housing, my mother-in-law lives in one up at Pine Hills where they just opened the new 90 unit one yesterday. They had a ribbon cutting for it. There is traffic in and out of there day and night. There has been a resident's brother got hit by a car and killed a couple years ago over on the east side of the property. I do have a couple more exhibits I'd like to show.

I just pulled a couple of those photos and I want to go through them.

All right this is a property that's directly on the north side of the lake up on orange center that believe the city of Orlando owns. I'm not sure if it was supposed to be affordable housing or not but it is zoned R3B. It has been sitting there for years abandoned. There's a city of Orlando anytime tow away zone on the property. is you know started construction and is has not completed there's vines growing on it uh just ask you please you know do not put on you know one of these affordable hellions in our unit it does not go with the character of the or the culture of our community so i have to say please be in opposition and if you haven't seen uh everybody here that's in opposition from our community we do have a big showing here and uh thanks for the thanks for your time thank you

daryl galtz rudy johnson christian thompson so you've got all of them i think i've only went through like one or two just for the record

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Gerald Gall. I live at 2701 Gulfstream Road, which is right across the street from the proposed project. As a matter of fact, there is some probability, high probability, that I wouldn't even be able to get out of my driveway because of the increased traffic flow. I received this notice from the city eight days ago and I've been at a loss trying to figure out why the city would even consider doing something like this. The aerial photo that the project planner showed at the outset was indicative of the problems that are caused by high density housing in a neighborhood. The statement made that there is R3 zoning on the west side of this project is only partially correct. On the northwest side is Gulfstream. And that's all R1, as is the rest of Gulfstream, of course. I am a relative newcomer. I guess I bought about the only remaining empty lot in Isle of Catalina 24 years ago. And it was considered unbillable because... It was such soft ground, but I and structural engineers figured out how to build on it, and I've lived there longer than any place else I've ever lived in my life. I really like the area as it is. Putting high density housing right across the street from me would totally destroy the entire character of that area. It is just a small residential street, which is incapable of supporting any additional apartments. That's about all I have. Thank you very much. And I sure hope you oppose with this R3 zone.

Rudy Johnson, Christian Thompson, and I apologize if I mispronounce this, Jennifer Vander Plaats. Okay. Sorry.

Good morning, board. Good morning, people from the Isle of Catalina. I'm a former deputy chief with Orlando Fire Department. And I've been in the aisle for 22 years. And I want to just address one of the issues, well, one of the statements that the developer said that they're going to build this place for firefighters, teachers, and police officers.

Could you speak up, sir?

Into the mic.

Or into the mic.

They said they're going to develop this place for affordable housing for firefighters, police officers, nurses, and stuff like that. Years ago, when I was a recruiter for a fire department, Orlando Fire Department, I did a study on the people that work for the fire department, police department, and less than 1% of those people that work for the city agencies live within the city of Orlando. Less than 3%. live in the county of Orange. So that's not a valid argument that they're going to build affordable housing for police fire and nurses and teachers and stuff because they don't even live in the city. They don't even live in the county, most of them don't. So that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Okay, Christian Thompson, Jennifer V., and John Hebert.

Hello, my name is Christian Thompson, 2610 Clear Cove Lane. Several people have said most of what I wanted to say, so rather than heavy reiteration, I'll just say a few words that I had to come up with on the spot today. I grew up in a poor neighborhood surrounded by low-income housing. My wife and I escaped California to find a better life here, and we have found just that. We spent our life savings to buy our house in this gem of a neighborhood just two years ago. This rezoning and construction will destroy our property value and crush this Orlando pearl, and I implore you to respect the wishes of me, my wife, and all of our wonderful neighbors here, and reject this proposal outright.

Thank you. Jennifer V., John Hebert, and Laurie Jo Brandefino.

Hello, my name is Jennifer Van Der Ploeg. I live in 2802 Gulf Street Court. It's hard not to get emotional because we moved into the neighborhood in 2014. We loved it so much. We made improvements on it. And the reason we moved there is because the school was right across the street. This said property, the Warwick Place, is going to be right across the street from us. It's going to destroy what I know as my way of life and the way of life for my neighbor Ronan, my neighbor Larry Johnson, We have nowhere else to go. We're retired. We built. We made neighbors. We have a community. As you know, Orlando has a future land use map, and they said anything that goes against the character of the neighborhood shouldn't be done. Going from R1 to R3 will definitely destroy our neighborhood. It does not go to the character of our neighborhood. We're a low-density housing area, and that's the way it should stay. Thank you.

Thank you. John Hebert, Laurie Jo Brandefino, and Danielle Torbert.

Good morning. I'm John Byron Hebert. I am from 2500 Caribbean Court. I first discovered the Isle of Catalina back in 2011 when I bought my first home here. It's hard to believe that was 15 years ago. Over the years, I've seen the transformation of the Isle of Catalina. What you now see is truly a hidden gem, if you haven't already noticed that from all these people who have shown up here. People care passionately about this neighborhood. We have a great community where lots of people are not just neighbors. They're friends. They're involved. We have people that work on the canals. We have people that deal with Neighborhood Watch. All these different things. That's because we care about our community. We didn't just show up here today because we don't want apartments and we don't care about affordable housing. We showed up here because we already have a community that we love and deeply care for. And we want to keep it that way. Most of the friends I've made since moving to Orlando, I've made right on the Isle of Catalina and Clear Lake. We have seven different canals. Whether you take your boat to someone's barbecue, you ride your bike, you walk there, it's a neat little community. One of the reasons why our community has stayed so good through the years was built in 1958. Now we're in 2026, and it's still a good community. Many parts of the city started off nice, then deteriorated and got to be areas people didn't want to live and never recovered. Our area has stayed nice because there's really three streets that come into the neighborhood and there's no bypass. There is no reason for other people really to drive through the neighborhood. It's not a cut through, doesn't go anywhere. So the people that travel the streets are people that live in the communities, the people that live at the end of the canals or whatnot. So our traffic is minimal because it's not a cut through. Now, we do have two schools already on Gulfstream. It's called 29th at that section, but basically it's Gulfstream. We have a middle school and an elementary school. Now, when those schools let out in the afternoon, there is massive traffic. Cars block the road. People sit in the road. Now, they have a school resource officer at the middle school. Does a great job directing traffic and everything else, but he's overloaded. The traffic just binds up, has nowhere to go, whatnot. Now you're thinking about adding another 100 units on that orally congested street during those times today. That's going to be dangerous for school children and everything else. And there's no place else for the traffic to go. The 2510, it's address Gulfstream. The school had entrances on Gulfstream. So there's no doubt if they build an apartment complex on it, it's going to have entrances on Gulfstream, which is going to directly affect us. Now, a lot of points that I had have already been touched on. The one thing I'm going to talk about is basically compatibility. It's been pointed out that there are two properties that are R3B that abut this property. That is true. However, it's apples to oranges because both of those properties, their only egress and their ingress is on LB McLeod, which is a major road that can handle that density of traffic. Our community cannot. I'm going to read you something real quick from the city of Orlando's future land use element, which is available on the city's website. It says, quote, Orlando's future land use philosophy centers on the neighborhood as the fundamental civic building block. In the more mature areas of the city, the policies of the future land use element seek to preserve and protect existing neighborhoods. In infill, redevelopment, and new growth areas, the city advocates creating mixed-use neighborhoods that seamlessly integrate with Orlando's established neighborhoods and employment districts. I close with this. How can the board make a meaningful determination of compatibility when no site plan, landscaping plan, buffering plan, building elevations, lighting plan, or traffic study has been provided? How can the board approve this zoning change that goes directly against the city of Orlando's own future land use philosophy? When this zoning change will not preserve or protect the existing community, it will not seamlessly integrate with this established neighborhood. This zoning request should be rejected as not compatible with the neighborhood. And if you have any doubt before voting on this, drive through the neighborhood and see what everyone's talked about. Drive on LV to Cloud, see what you have there, and then drive on Gold Street. You will see we're talking about two totally different things, so this should be denied. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Professor. Laurie Jo Brandefino, Danielle Torbert, Samantha Caviet, I think is what it was.

Good morning. Thank you. My name is Laurie Jo Brandefino, and I live at 3114 Martinique Way, and I've been there in Isla Catalina since 2003. I'm speaking today in resolute opposition to this case. Many of the points have been made. I can't read the whole thing, but I want to say... This community supports citywide missions to build affordable housing. Good public policy becomes dangerous public planning when forced onto an incompatible site. And this application represents a critical failure on the four distinct fronts. First, it violates the city's future land use map designations. The growth management plan dictates that zoning changes must strictly conform to established flume framework. Our neighborhood is designated for low density residential uses. Attempting to force an intensive R3 footprint into this location breaks that legal continuity of the flume. Second, the zoning continuity. Since 1957, the Isle of Catalina has been an unbroken fabric of single family homes. This multifamily disruption is an incapable spot zoning and directly violates the growth management plan's legal mandate to protect established neighborhoods. Third, they haven't brought up catastrophic flooding, even the city. Under LDC section 59.101, a development order cannot be issued without sufficient stormwater capacity. Our streets already suffer from severe flooding, most recently during Hurricane Ian. The R3 footprint drastically increases this impervious service ratio, forcing excess runoff straight onto adjacent single family homes. fourth, which has been addressed, but the traffic and school safety. Under LDC section 59.103, the high density shift creates an immediate vehicle trip surge directly into the high volume active footprint of Catalina Elementary School and Memorial Middle School. The streets are already locked up in the morning with lines, medical, school buses, parent lines. If there's a fire or medical crisis occurs during these school hours, trucks and ambulances could be physically gridlocked and blocked from entering the community. Finally, the applicant fails the LDC section 65.383 variance standards, maximizing unit counts for financial feasibility is a self-created financial hardship. Under Orlando law, financial constraints shall not constitute grounds for approval. The applicant has failed to prove that this aggressive design represents the minimal possible variance to make reasonable use of this property. A code compliant, lower density project can easily be built here without destroying our neighborhood or risking public safety. Noble intent cannot excuse a hazarded site selection. I urge this board to maintain the integrity of our neighborhood, protect our school children, and uphold the infrastructure limits of Chapter 59 and deny this request. Thank you for listening.

Thank you.

Danielle Torbert, Samantha Caviet, and Keith Andrew will be the last speaker.

Good morning. My name is Danielle Torbert. I live at 2505 Catalina Drive. For eight months of last year, I served as the CFO of Catholic Charities of Central Florida, where I managed and helped with the finances of nine subsidized housing properties specifically aimed at seniors. I still sit on the board at Catholic Charities. I sit on the board of the HOA as the treasurer. And I tell you that not to let you know that I have no life, but to tell you that I care about my community. I care about people. I want to help people be able to afford where they can live. but I have major concerns about changing this into an apartment complex in the middle of my neighborhood. And I bought my house in this neighborhood because my brother has lived off of Rio Grande for 10 years, and I've seen the entire area really increase. People are buying the houses, they're remodeling, they're fixing it up. I feel like the crime has decreased. However, there still are times that I wake up in the night, I hear gunshots, or I hear the helicopter circling overhead, and I'm afraid because I live alone, and I'm right next to the park. There aren't neighbors all around me. On a regular basis, people walk from the park into my backyard, and my neighbors, Andy's over there, my neighbors and I watch out for each other to say, hey, there's someone in your backyard. Please be careful, or we'll go ask them to leave. I've gone down to my dock plenty of times, been sipping my coffee, and as I turn to walk back up to my house, I see people sleeping in the park right next to my house.

I tell you all of this because this is gonna significantly increase the attention to our neighborhood.

My house is across from the park where the kids play football in the spring and in the fall, they play different sports. Everyone driving into the neighborhood past the schools is going to pass my house to get to the apartment complexes. Already my neighbors let me know that they watch my house on a regular basis because they'll be like, why were you up on the roof yesterday? Oh, I saw a car in your driveway that I didn't recognize. Oh, I should get a new car. People watch my house. People driving to an apartment complex who didn't know that our neighborhood existed are going to see my house. They walk past my house to the park. I'm very visible. So for my sake, for the sake of my neighbors with their children, please think about your families. Think about your nieces, your sisters, your mothers, people who work hard for what they have. Please think about our safety and just consider that when you're making this decision. I understand that this is a financial decision. I understand that eight and a half acres is going to be developed. But please find another solution that doesn't put any of us and our safety at risk. Thank you.

Thank you.

Samantha and then Keith. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Samantha Causey. I live at 2412 Lauderdale Court. I have been a member of the Isle of Catalina for the past nine years. We purchased our home in 2018. And at that time, there wasn't a lot of young families in our neighborhood. Six months after we purchased our home, we were the victims of a burglary of an occupied dwelling with a deadly weapon. We chose to stay in our neighborhood because it has been a beautiful neighborhood. After that happened, our neighborhood came together and we have built our own security system. All of my neighbors have cameras. All of us look out for each other. As you heard, we all know where everybody lives, what everybody's doing, who's supposed to be where. We have to use our own resources, our own funds to protect our neighborhood. I'm sorry, it still overwhelms me. We chose to continue to live in our neighborhood because like all of these other young couples that have moved in in the last five years, I have seen so many families with children move into our neighborhood. And it makes me feel like I made the right decision to stay. And we have put our life savings into these homes. These are not cheap homes. They are on the water. You can purchase them. A lot of us have purchased them on the lower end of their life. And Tons and tons and tons of money, our young family monies, has been put into these neighborhoods to fix our homes. Two years ago, my house was robbed again. That is two times. This time, luckily, we were not home. But that same man that robbed my home and killed somebody on my next street four months later. Our home was robbed in September and a life was taken the following February by a longtime resident. Because so much crime happens in the area that our house got robbed and it didn't seem like it was such a big deal at the time. But that man went out and committed a murder shortly after. I have three young children. A lot of, like I said, the families that are coming in have young children. What they're talking about, what he showed there, where there's the one entrance, we don't have sidewalks. Where I live in the back side of the neighborhood, there's no sidewalks. Only on the front side of the neighborhood where they're talking about putting in these complex apartments. My kids can't play up at the front of the neighborhood now because it's traffic coming in and out. When it's school time, there's two exits to the neighborhood. You can go out the back side. You can go out the front side. I don't allow my children to go to the school in our neighborhood because it's an F-rated school. And the suspension rate in an elementary school is 10%. I find that intolerable. The park in my neighborhood, while I do go there, it's a high crime area as well. There's graffiti all over it, drugs constantly being used there in the neighborhood. If we allow this to come in, more and more crime is going to come into our neighborhood, and I don't think it's acceptable to all of us and all the young families that are here. Thank you.

Thank you. Keith, Andrew? And this is the last speaker request I have on the list.

Good morning to the board and the Uptown community. Keith Andrews. I live at 3001 Rio Lane. I live, I guess, just east of where the proposed building is. I've been there for 54 years. I've seen where Catalina was and now where it's at now. That used to be where they want to put it at, at Catalina. As the doctor said about Franciscan apartments, Franciscan, again, it was a great place. But eventually, as people grow, and we use that word growth a lot, as people grow, they left and moved in, other people came in, and the whole community went down. As a young man mentioned earlier too about the traffic patterns, there is only one way in. I don't understand how they're going to do that because it's only so many ways to come into that community. The school zone that someone said earlier, right down the corner of Rio Lane and 29th Street is inundated with the kids and paper and gentlemen. I'm a founder of anti-bullying force and bullying. It's horrible. I've sat there with the chief. I go to some of these meetings. I've talked to the chief about being reactive in so many times. We're proactive. And it's a horrible thing. As an aircraft engineer, you know, There's a reason for capacity. You can put only so many people on a plane, so much luggage on a plane, so much. And if you want to do something like that, I think, again, board, I understand growth, but we're at capacity. We can't take anywhere. There's only so much air you can put in a tire. There's only so many people you can put on an aircraft. We're at capacity with that. And I tell my neighbors as well, you know, a lot of times we want to be on the defense offensively. Let's think it's up. That area has been there. Nothing's been there for a long time. Put something else there. I know we want to put something there. You know, you walk by. To me, it is kind of like an eyesore. But we do. But having affordable housing, I don't think that's the answer. That's it.

Thank you.

All right. That concludes our speaker request at this time. We do have a request as we close out the public comment period for a 10-minute recess. So we'll take that now, and then we'll come back at, what is it, 1055, let's call it. And the restrooms are out the door. Go out to the lobby and take a left. Thank you. Did you get skipped over? Okay. You can talk to the board secretary there.

I've done a lot of stuff with the county, but I don't work with him. Yeah. He finished his term, but

My turn.

Six members present.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you. So before we get started again, we do have a couple of conflicts to declare with board members, including myself. The developer I found out is a client of my firm. However, I'm not affiliated with this project, but I will abstain from voting and likewise.

I also need to declare a conflict. I filed the appropriate paperwork and I will not be voting in this matter.

All right, just for information, we still maintain the ability to comment as the proceedings go, and I will continue to moderate. As we start again, I would like to open it up with any questions the board might have to the staff or any staff comments following public comment, and then we'll open it up to the applicant to speak once again.

Yes, sir. I do have a couple of points to bring out in regards to some of the comments that the residents did bring up. Point number one, the future land use, it will remain residential low intensity. Currently, the future land use allows for 12 dwelling units per acre. And so it will still remain 12 dwelling units per acre with the residential low future land use designation. Also, the zoning map I have placed upon the screen once again, So the narrative of the table does not include the R1A on the west side because the bulk is R3B, but the zoning map does show those properties that still remain R1A as well. Okay. Also, the environmental, as Jason previously stated as well, that it was not required due to the fact that it was once a developed property and there are no wetlands impacts or anything of that nature on site. So that particular condition was waived for the environmental assessment. And also access, I hear a lot about going along Gulf Stream. One of the requirements for 100 units is that access is required to have two points of access for the site. So our transportation department will look at the time of master plan, but where those two points of access would be. And preferably, I believe that they would require some going to the south. as well. And they can continue to speak to that as well.

All right. Thank you, Ms. Jones. Do we have any additional questions for staff at this point?

Yeah, thank you. I think it's pretty obvious by the number of people that have shown up here that there's a question of transparency in regards to the notification. I think by the number of people that have shown up here, my experience is that typically when you get this large of a group, there's a question of transparency and the notification to the community for open discussion before it reaches this stage. So my question is, I know one of the gentlemen brought up a piece of paper, which I'm familiar with. It says he got it eight days ago. I don't know if that was in regards to this meeting or if it was to any other public meetings. But that being said, when were the public meetings held and what notification was given to these residential homeowners who sit around this area that are going to be impacted?

So in regards to this application here, this is the first public hearing meeting for this particular case. And we do encourage the applicant to speak with the residents prior to their submitting an application. And I believe that the school board may have, I'm not sure at what point in time, but however, it was indicated that the school board has been reaching out to this particular community.

Thank you. Then we have an additional question from Board Member Barrett. And then as a reminder, after the applicant's speech, we will bring it back to the board for discussion as well.

So one of the requirements I see for rezoning kind of hinges on public welfare and necessity. Is there a change or change in the condition to the area to warrant the modification?

I can't speak to that per se, but it is a vacant piece of property was once developed with the school on it. It does have a residential low intensity designation. So therefore the request would follow the future land use designation for sure. And they're coming to you to increase the density of it from 5.7 with the current zoning to 12. So they can still stay within the residential low intensity designation.

Mr. Chair, I might add a little bit to this discussion. Recently, there's an enrolled and passed bill by the state legislature, House Bill 1389, which expanded the Live Local Act. It makes properties owned by school district, religious institutions, and municipalities eligible to utilize the provisions of the Live Local Act, which allows for the live local density entitlement, which means the largest intensity or densities, if you will, that's allowed in the city is allowed to happen on school board properties in this particular enrolled bill. That goes up to 200 units to the acre, as well as the allowable height within a mile or two of the particular site, which would be 75 units acre. And it's a preemptive provision of the state law. In other words, we don't have a choice as a city whether or not we want it. It's a right of the property owner itself. and it requires for administrative approval. So you have an applicant that's come before you that's essentially going through the process of notifying the neighborhood. Otherwise, if the governor does not sign that particular law in two weeks by July 1st, it becomes effective, or he might sign it in the meantime. Either way, those things would be a significant change to the preemptive laws that the city must follow for affordable housing. And just to note, this is an area of developing law, obviously, so the housing department planner, she can explain some of the affordability requirements if you choose to hear them. Sure. Of course, that means the legislatures pass a law. It's enrolled for signature by the governor at this point in time, so that would change July 1st.

Yeah, if she could expand a little bit on it, that would be fine.

Okay, Jessica, if you mind.

Hello, thank you, Board. I am Jessica Fry. I work in our Housing and Community Development Department, and I am going to just speak a little bit on the income limits that are required. And then with Live Local or most of the Florida Housing Finance Corporation, who's the primary financer of projects such as these, the affordability period will range from 30 to 50 years. However, with Live Local, there is a requirement of 30 years. I know somebody had asked about the affordability period. And so that information is there. What we're looking at tends to range, live local allows up to 120% AMI. The typical product that we get with our Florida Housing Finance Corporation projects are around 80% AMI and below. And so what I'm going to tell you is just what the income limits are for one person, a family of four, and then what the rent limits are for a one bedroom to two bedroom unit. So you can get a kind of a good gauge of what's going to be offered at this product. So for somebody at 80% AMI, one person at 80% AMI is earning about $64,400. And then a one-bedroom unit, and this is usually utilities included, is about $1,725. For 120% AMI, which I'm not saying that this project is going to have that, but that it could if utilizing Live Local, 120%, can you hear me?

Excuse me, we have to keep order in here. You've spoken when the public forum was open. Thank you.

The use is a public benefit use for affordable housing. And so I just wanted to talk about what 120% AMI if utilizing live local so that you have those facts. So one person, oh, and I forgot to read the four person. So a family of four at 80% AMI is earning about $91,920. A two bedroom for a family of four right now is the bedroom with two bedrooms is $20,000.

So then for 120% AMI, one person is at $96,600.

A family of four is about $137,880. A two-bedroom is $3,100, and then a one-bedroom is about $2,587 at 120% AMI. That is the maximum that anybody can do on a live local product. Again, you're going to see at or below 80% probably with a Florida Housing Finance Corporation product, which is what typically the Wendover Group does.

Thank you. Thank you. And we have an additional question.

I just want to clarify because... This is not being developed as leave local, right? Under leave local.

What I'm saying is it could be developed under Live Local after July 1st of this year, should the governor not sign the bill or sign the bill in the meantime.

When the initial application came in, it was a couple months ago, and that's when we were starting to wrap up the legislative session, and so we weren't completely sure if that resolution, if that was going to pass by the legislature. It kind of has, but we still came before because this product, although 100 units... It's still at 12 dwelling units per acre and it's three stories at 35 feet. That's the product that they're proposing. They need the entitlements to start really working on the project and get it to fruition.

The bottom line is potentially after July 1st, they would not require the rezoning. Right.

It would just be an administrative approval after July.

Yeah, it's a required preemption by the state for us to approve such.

Okay.

I have a question as well. Sure. And I know I'm aware this is a zoning meeting, but does the county or the school system have a plan for how they would select who lives there? Or this is going to be free market, whoever comes or do they have actual plan to say we're going to help select employees or things of that nature?

I think with that, I'd like to just move to the applicant to respond. And can you address that question? Any others you'd feel?

Good morning, Board. Ryan Von Weller, Wendover Housing Partners, 1105 Kensington Park Drive in Altamont Springs. So thank you guys for having this morning and thank you for your guys' comments. I certainly appreciate them. I know it's a great part of our democracy and part of these processes. So I'm here to answer any questions you have after my brief statements here. But I wanted to make a couple of things clear. We've built affordable housing and workforce housing all over the state of Florida, inclusive of a project here under construction with the city of Orlando right now on Orange Center Boulevard. So this step in the process is really our initial phase of we haven't have a site plan. We don't have all the funding. We don't have a cooked development ready to go that we're trying to shove down the throats of everybody here. But we have to have zoning in place in order to start looking at what we can do with the site. So what we came to the city with was an actual straight rezone and not a PD rezone. So we're not looking for different setbacks, different things from the code. We'll abide by the code as it's written. But the unit count of 40 to 50 as currently allowed is not really feasible in conjunction with the Orange County Housing Trust Fund nor with Florida Housing. 80 to 100 units is pretty much what you need to get an affordable housing development built. So we, as a developer, own these in perpetuity. We don't build these, convert them to market rate, turn them into Section 8 and sell them to somebody else. That's not what we do. We keep them at the income limits and at the restriction that they are set to initially for a period of 55 years. And the state requires 30 via live local, but we do 55 as per our funding regulations. So this will be our project at these affordable limits in perpetuity for the effective life of the development. So this is not Section 8 housing. This is housing that people that live here will have jobs for the most part. You may have some retirees or some people on fixed income. But these are people that are going to live in a market rate community that have restricted rents. It is not going to be what people commonly think of as affordable housing, low-income housing, fully amenitized, a pool, a gym, you know, everything encapsulated inside there. And I'll let my partner and engineer talk about traffic flows and those kind of things. That's kind of beyond my pay grade. But your question about how do we target? So another change of Live Local and also the state of Florida is fair housing laws have changed slightly where we can use federal tax credits in the state of Florida to target specific employment bases. So Orange County Public Schools has a vested interest in housing teachers and their employees. They have a hard time recruiting right now. They have a hard time retaining because the cost of living in central Florida is so high. They don't have anywhere for people to live. And I heard one of the comments earlier, a very small percentage of people in the fire department live in Orlando and Orange County. That's because they can't. And so what our objective is and we try to do is to provide housing for those employees. And now that we can target these specific industries, it gives us the ability to work on properties that they own. So in partnership with the Orange County Public School System, our lease with them indicates that 51% of the units at a minimum will go to their employees. Now, of course, there's caveats to that. If no one shows up to lease them, that won't be the case. Of course, it'll be oversubscribed immediately. But they have a vested interest in housing their employees first, and we are now allowed to do that. So that's a significant change from what usually exists. Now, will there be people there that work for the city of Orlando, work for private sector industries? Yes, of course there will be. But our objective is to do this project in conjunction with Orange County Public Schools to provide them with housing for their specific need. That's codified in the lease as well with them.

All right. Thank you. Thank you for that. Any questions, any additional for the applicant?

I do have one more question. And again, being the newbie here, correct me if it's not a well-placed question, but there was a comment earlier about when the property was originally sold that there were some covenants there requiring it to be used for a certain thing. How far do we look into that? Does that exist or is that relevant or?

So it's not within the MPB's purview to discuss the deed restriction? Because we can't tell if it's valid or not. That's between the purchaser and the seller. Your job is to determine whether this project meets the city's code requirements, not the private deed.

All right. If we have no additional questions for the applicant,

I don't mind. In 2023, the state legislature and the governor signed a law that preempts or overrides local requirements for development for affordable and specifically workforce housing that goes up to 120% of the area median income. if you will. So what means is that we don't have a choice. We have to approve affordable housing in certain situations. In the past, that applied to commercial and non-residential properties and industrial properties. This legislative session, the legislature just passed a new law that will go into effect July 1st in two weeks that says regardless potentially what happens here today, they have the right to develop it administratively up to 200 units of the acre. They're proposing 12 units of the acre. as well as the maximum heights within a certain distance of the site, which would be 75 feet in height. So they're before the board today to consider a 35-foot zoning designation, as well as R3, which has 12 units to the acre. So you have to consider that in the context of the decision as to what's happening with the state law right now regarding preemptions. Like I said, like I mentioned, hold on. Like I mentioned earlier, it passed the state legislature and is enrolled for the governor's signature. If the governor signs it in the next two weeks before July 1st, it becomes effective. Or if he doesn't sign it, it's an automatic, it gets approved. So potentially in the next two weeks, we might have a new law where the city might be obligated, but not as of today, correct? You got it. The governor can do what he wants, so that's the thing. He can either veto it, he cannot sign it, it becomes effective, or he can sign it earlier. And we don't know what the government is going to do. Now, I will say there's a trend over the last four years from the state legislature and governor to preempt local laws and regulations to allow affordable housing to move forward.

And Jason, may I just add that as part of Leave Local, if you were to be approved, what Jason mentioned earlier is that part of the development that is administratively approved, that means it wouldn't even come to us. It's an administrative approval. covers the highest density that the city allows, which because obviously Orlando has downtown, it's an extremely high density. It's 200. Is that what it is? 200 units per acre?

Correct. 200 units per acre. So it's the highest density within the jurisdiction. And then the allowable highest height within a certain mileage of the site.

Yes, I believe it's within one mile. So in reality, what this means, though, it doesn't mean that they're going to put 200 units per acre here because there's other constraints. But it means that they could potentially go for a higher density than what is being proposed today.

all right with that we will close public hearing and bring it back to the board for discussion or any consideration of emotion we cannot sorry public forum has closed so any board deliberation yes i have a question

Is it inconceivable to not stop the process, but to give the public an opportunity to speak to the school board? Again, I'm going back to transparency and communication. And I think we've seen in many of our cases that we have less participation when there's conversation. Is there a way for us to put this on hold, so to speak, until there is that meeting since obviously they are aware of it now?

J. Obviously it's the pleasure of the board um what in what you're comfortable with making a decision we don't require that applicant hold a public hearing, but we never advise them that the public hearing is the first public meeting that residents would be coming to.

So I guess that was my point, is that if we could make this slow down just a hair and let the public meet with the developer and with Orange County School Board before it gets back to us, if that's a possibility, that's the way I would vote.

So there will be a motion for a continuance?

Is that what you're requesting?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes, so I would like to make a motion for continuance based on those.

Do we want to set a specific date for when it would come back to the Municipal Planning Board?

Certainly make it for the next potential meeting, which is July 7th.

So we have a standing motion? Yes.

I don't know if the motion has been made properly. I think we stayed your motion there, Board Member Caller.

So the next municipal planning board meeting will be July the 21st, I believe. Yeah.

So it's your motion. So I want to restate the motion that we continue this to July 21st, giving the community an opportunity to meet with the developer as well as Orange County School District.

We have a motion and a second. motions from board member Daley. Second was from board member Jackson. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And then reminder, we have two abstaining.

That motion would pass.

Motion passes.

So we'll hear this again. It will not be re-advertised, but it would be continued to the next municipal planning board meeting, July 21st. So we'll see you then.

Thank you.

Let everyone take a moment to clear the chambers. We do have another well attended item to attend to. All right. Maybe we can proceed. We're on to item number eight. This is 170 East Washington Street, the mixed-use tower amendment. The applicant is Jason Cyril Maynard Nexen, PC. The owner is 170 Washington, Orlando, LLC. The location is 170 East Washington Street and generally located on the south side of East Washington Street, west of North Wausland Avenue, north of Wall Street. and east of North Magnolia Avenue. It's on 0.633 acres. The district is in District 5. Project planner is Laura Ng. This is filed under case numbers ZON-2026-10004. This is a plan development amendment for a 37-story building with 252 dwelling units and 221 hotel rooms on expense. and approximately or approximately excuse me 135 000 square feet of office and retail space the recommended actions approval requests subject to conditions the staff report and laura will give a presentation and overview of the project thanks

Good afternoon, board members. My name is Laura Ang. I am a planner too. And today I'll be presenting on the case for 170 East Washington Street for a mixed use tower. It is for a plan development amendment. To begin, the project is located again at 170 East Washington Street in the Central Business District at the southwest intersection of East Washington Street and North Roslyn Ave on a .6 acre lot within District 5. For some background, this lot has previously been approved at City Council for a planned development and some planned development amendments starting in 2007 for the Rosalind and then September 2007, an amendment for the Crystal in 2008. It was approved for a PD amendment for the Crystal. And then in 2011, it was adopted as the most recent planned development for Cambria Suites. In 2012, the office building that once existed there was demolished. And then as of 2017, the current owner purchased the property, and it has been sitting vacant since the office building was demolished in 2012. Okay, on this next slide, I am showing the series of planned developments and amendments that were approved leading up to now with the current amendments on the right side. I'll circle back to this as well, but if you just wanna take a moment and look at the densities and the uses that were previously approved, maybe the most similar, Plan development approval was for the first plan that approved up to 31 stories with a building height of around 350 feet with over 300 parking spaces and some residential condos as well as some non-residential uses. The requested action today is to amend the current PD or the PD that was previously approved in 2011 to now allow for 252 residential units, a program flexibility of 221 hotel rooms, or... 135,000 square feet of office space, ground floor retail, food and beverage, a minimum of 250 parking spaces, and 37 stories with a building of up to 425 feet in height. and finally for a density and intensity bonus specifically a 9.0 floor area ratio intensity bonus and if you see the table to the right here is a basic breakdown comparing what is proposed on the right to what was previously approved in 2011. And I will emphasize the previous PD was approved or this most recent one was approved only for a hotel room use. But in the past, as you've seen, there's been a variation of both hotel and residential uses proposed. And just to summarize the more substantial changes, the proposed height now is 425 feet or up to 425 feet, whereas it was last approved for 100. It was approved in 2011 for 155 hotel units, whereas it is now proposing either 221 hotel units or, again, 135,000 square feet of office space. Again, the previous use was for a hotel, so it did not provide residential dwelling units and is now providing 252. The parking was capped at 55 for the previous PD, where it is now proposing about 250. And the intensity was for 3.31 floor area ratio, where it is now up to 9.04 floor area ratio. The future land use and zoning of the site on the left, you'll see that the future land use for this general neighborhood is downtown activity center. And surrounding the site, it is also mostly AC3A or downtown metropolitan activity center. However, this specific vacant site, again, has been zoned as PD as far back as 2006. Here's an aerial photo showing immediate context of the site and the adjacent properties. To the south is the St. George Orthodox Church. I've included the building heights and stories. So the St. George Church is about 60 feet in height. To the west is AT&T Corp. They have six stories and approximately 60 feet in height. To the north is the Metropolitan at Lake Eola. These are residential condominiums and they are six stories, approximately 60 feet in height, as well as the Aspire Apartments and Office Tower that is 31 stories and approximately 360 feet in height. And of course, Lake Eola. Here's the proposed changes once more. I do want to emphasize that the proposed floor area ratio requests a intensity bonus and the proposed density or dwelling units to acre is also requesting a density bonus in the underlying zoning district of AC 380. There is a allowable 200 units per acre and at point six acres, the applicant is requesting up to 400 units per acre to allow for up to 252 dwelling units. Conformance with the growth management plan and future land use. The first goal of the downtown metropolitan activity center future land use designation is to strengthen downtown as a regional hub. The high intensity residential hotel office and retail uses proposed in the tower do reinforce the downtown's economic and cultural role. Objective 1.2 is to activate street life with ground floor dining proposed and retail uses. This allows for more vibrant and pedestrian-oriented streetscape. And with Objective 1.6 to increase housing supply, this proposes 252 new residential units downtown supporting a balanced mixed-use urban core. Continuing to goal two, supporting compact growth and varied skyline. The 37-story tower aligns with the AC3A's underlying zoning district, high intensity core, and contributes to a distinct skyline. Goal three, to enhance design quality and public realm. The architecture and active ground floor uses do enhance the public space and cultural identity. And for finally goal four, it does promote a multimodal and walkable downtown, seeing that the density and mix of uses is within walking distance of transit and reinforces pedestrian friendly mobility. So to summarize, it does support the Downtown Activity Center goals by increasing housing supply, adding high intensity mix of uses that is consistent with the Downtown Metropolitan Activity Center, and it promotes pedestrian activity. for the requested density and intensity bonuses. So again, at 252 units, it would require up to 400 dwelling units per acre, which is the maximum density that would be granted with a density bonus. It does provide needed housing supply in the Downtown Activity Center. And again, the Downtown Activity Center is intended to be one of our densest districts. For the intensity bonus, the proposed floor area ratio, so non-residential uses such as the hotel units or the office scenario, if we went with the hotel use, we would, or the applicant would need a 6.8 floor area ratio if they went with the office use they would need a 4.9 floor area ratio both of which fall within the maximum allowable 9.0 floor air ratio permitted with an intensity bonus upon reviewing this application uh The growth management team supports the density intensity bonuses for residential hotel or residential and office scenarios. And here's a chart just sort of summarizing the need for density and intensity bonuses. For the zoning and land uses, the Cambria Suites PD district already allowed for hotel, eating, and drinking establishment uses, both of which are being proposed with this current PD amendment. And the PD amendment also requests office use as well as multifamily residential use, both of which are permitted by the underlining AC380 zoning district. Review of the urban design architecture. The urban design proposed or the architecture proposed with this project does preserve the view of the historic church's stained glass facade with the carve out of the first four floors of the podium. It does have a tall open plaza at the base to interact with the streetscape. The activated ground floor with retail proposed as well as eating and drinking establishments also complements the streetscape and urban design. And the podium for parking. So going to The applicant did have to go to a courtesy review for appearance, or they didn't have to, but they did a courtesy appearance review board review. And during that review, staff completed their appearance review and recommended that they carve up additional – additional space on the parking podium to allow even more of a space between the proposed structure and the existing church. And the applicant was agreeable to carving up an additional podium space essentially allowing the first four levels of the structure to have an additional 22 foot setback to allow more space for the church to breathe essentially. And the streetscape design along East Washington Street does need to be carefully considered to balance pedestrian priority of the streetscape. The applicant was agreeable to allowing a 15-foot streetscape on either sides of the property. And should this application be approved, the applicant would need to come back for a formal appearance review board review. Okay, I am sharing the south and east elevation. So the first three floors, or the first four floors would be carved out, again, to leave sort of an additional setback from the church property. And then above that, there would be six levels of parking, And then beyond that would be either the hotel or office space. And then beyond that are the residential units on top. Also included a few renderings provided by the architect. You can see the streetscape a bit here. and this carved out podium adjacent to the church, as well as the amenity deck with the pool. And here's a streetscape rendering showing just the first three floors carved out with the transparency to allow for views of the adjacent church. And again, this would be carved out once more to accommodate the appearance review board comments. Some transportation planning comments. There are two access points proposed on Washington Street. And parking is voluntary in Zone A for downtown parking. However, the applicant proposes at least 250 spaces to provide at least one parking space for each of the residential units. The applicant has provided a auto turn analysis for an SUV as far as how they would maneuver throughout the site and parking garage. However, further analysis would be required at the master plan stage. Here's the ground floor plan that shows the two access points along East Washington Street. This access point would allow for loading. You could also see the church setback here in the carve out, as well as the streetscapes. Because this is a tall structure, it does need to undergo airspace and tall structure review. Staff has reached out to GOA for a preliminary airspace analysis, and they determined that the proposed 425 feet is still would be allowable as the maximum is 522 feet tall. In this area, however, should this case be approved, the applicant would have to undergo a formal GOA review and receive the required permits from the FAA and GOA. Staff's recommendation based on our analysis is that the evaluation criteria for planned developments is compatible with the surrounding development patterns and can be adequately served by public facilities due to the conditions outlined in the report. If this request is approved, the next steps in the development review process, of course, the project would have to go to city council for approval. It would have to come back to finalize the master plan in the form of an administrative master plan. And it would also have to undergo a formal appearance review before the appearance review board and finally obtain their building permits. Some notable conditions from the staff report, growth management supports their requests for either a hotel or office, not both. Although the applicant did not request both in tandem, they are agreeable to either the hotel or office space and conforming to the maximum 9.0 floor area ratio. Under land development, it's important that the applicant uses a sensitive construction method to allow for a pile installation, especially with consideration to the historic church adjacent to the property. And the applicant is agreeable to that. And of course, they need to obtain their airport height zoning permit. For urban design, the ARB major certificate is required. For transportation, further auto turn analysis would be required at the time of master plan review. And to just drill down further into the parking, sight lines, walkways, water, sewer, public works would all have to be reviewed at the time of master plan review. And fireplace and other operational requirements would also go under further review for master plan review. Finally, staff recommends approval of ZON 2026-10004, subject to the conditions in the staff report. And I also have the packet of additional materials from the architect I'd like to bring up. Sorry. I just didn't want to include them all in the PowerPoint, but I wanted to scan through these. And then if you had additional questions, we could go back and take a look at them. It's a pretty dense packet. There's parking with the auto turn analysis for an SUV. These next few floors are parking. This would be the amenities floor with the pool. potential hotel units, and then residential units. And I'll scroll down to some of the elevations and renderings. And here is an elevation with the adjacent church and the carve out. At this time, I will accept any questions from the board. Thank you.

All right. Thank you very much. Any questions currently?

I just have one. Is the applicant carrying any sort of concession for any sort of damages that may happen to that church? while they do, if they're doing driven piles and not stone piles, depending on the pile condition they'll be using for the project, are they getting any sort of concession for that?

Well, just to answer that question, one of the staff conditions in the report is that they would have to use an alternative method to pile driving, if you will. And I'm sure the applicant can describe that a little bit more and what they might be. Yep.

oh jason could you repeat that and get a little closer to the mic

One of the conditions in the staff report is that they have to do a different method than pile driving, which is a percussive way of pounding in the piles that support the structure into the bedrock, if you will. So they're required to do an alternative method that's more sensitive, both from a noise and vibration perspective, whether it's augering or other types of a situation that would be more sensitive towards the church next door. and I'll have the applicant address any other types of concerns.

I have one. Can you, if you wouldn't mind, just list out some of the bonus criteria? What are some of the items that were required to achieve?

Excuse me while I pull up my PowerPoint again. The growth management section does support, or it does have a goal of achieving a high intensity urban core, transit supportive development, and active street life, all of which our staff feels is adequate in this application. And it is within the threshold of up to a 9.0 bonus. So if they propose or if they move forward with the hotel scenario, they would be below the maximum bonus allowed at 6.8. Or if they go forward with the office scenario, they would still be within the limit at up to 4.9. So because they fall within the maximum allowable density of up to 400 dwelling units per acre with the bonus, because they're activating the streetscape and providing additional housing, the growth management team and staff agree that the bonus is appropriate for the proposal.

Okay. Essentially, it's on the merit of residential units. All right. Thank you. Any additional questions at this time for the board before we open up here? All right. Seeing none. Thank you very much. If the applicant would like to speak this time.

Thank you. I was waiting for my cue. Good morning, almost afternoon. Jason Searle, Maynard Nexen, 200 East New England Avenue, Offices, Winter Park. First, thank you very much to staff. Missing's presentation was both thorough and and hit about six items that I was planning to hit in my remarks. So I very much appreciate her diligence and efforts to date. Mr. Burton in his leadership on this project, Mr. Metzger and Mr. Forbes in the ARB process. And I'll just be very brief, and I would ask for an opportunity to retort to any public comment, but in the name of anticipating what I believe will be coming next, what we have here is going to be a first to market for the city's central business district a project that has not been done in the city's core this mix of uh exciting transformative residential hospitality grand ground floor retail food and beverage um together with uh an indoor outdoor dining component is going to be, as you saw from the renderings, the most impressive and we're hoping to be a catalyst for other like developments within the city's core along our jewel Lake Eola in downtown. That being said, I anticipate, and we went through this with the ARB discussion, we have been for years. In fact, Father John of our adjacent church, I consider Father John a friend. He and I have had many discussions over many years. And in fact, when I was here... almost 10 years ago, he came and spoke and actually offered up his support as well. Most recently in the lead up to this, and it's detailed on page 18 of the staff report, going back to the fall, we have been outreaching to church leadership. We've been engaging with our neighbors. We too appreciate and want to respect the landmark church adjacent to us. And I think as I'll explain to you and Ms. Ng touched on in her opening remarks, we have done above and beyond to accommodate their considerations and concerns. And actually, we look at it as exemplifying the church, most specifically the stained glass windows along the north side of the property, if you're familiar with the church. So going back to the fall, we've engaged in conversations. Unfortunately, it never really produced too much traction, but we have been interested and concerned with their well-being, as Mr. Burden said, correctly pointed out. In fact, our first, our primary condition of approval is related to address the church's stated concerns, and we had a conversation about it at the ARB Courtesy Review, which we did on our own volition to help forward that conversation with the church. So, Quote, condition of approval number one, to help reduce construction-related vibrations and avoid damage to adjacent buildings, an appropriate construction methodology must be used to install deep foundation piles and lay underground utilities subject to review by the city architect. a highly regulated, a highly controlled method. It's all throughout not only our city, our state, the entire country, these processes and procedures by which we install the pilings necessary to hold a 37-floor building. We have to do so within certain... vibration requirements. Additionally, number one condition of approval, the staff, the city's architect will approve it before we proceed with it. We will of course go to ARB again. But I believe, and I think ARB staff will agree, it's the most impressive and wonderful tower. It's going to be an amazing project. Our project management team is here with me. I'd be happy to answer any questions, as would they, but really excited to take this first big official step to bring this to downtown Orlando. I'd be happy to answer any questions. And again, if I could, ask for a few minutes at the end to respond to public comment. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for the applicant at this point?

I just had a question or two more about the uses so it talks about having condo residential condo and hotels is that if you do a hotel is the thought that it'll be a condo hotel product or a more traditional flag owned or operated?

That's a great question. Thank you. Actually, the reason this is first to market for Orlando is we hope to partner with a luxury hotel brand. And I'm just going to read some names. This is in our project narrative. We see these a lot through South Florida. They have come into Sarasota, St. Petersburg, Tampa. So they're making their way to us. A few examples include, and for those to kind of image what this would be like, would be the Amman Hotel and Residences, Miami Beach, Waldorf Astoria Hotel and Residences, Miami, the Albers branded Shore Club, Miami, and the Albers Shell Bay, Hallandall Beach. Five-star hotel brands such as the Four Seasons and the Ritz-Carlton had developed luxury condo projects. That would be what we would aspire to be.

And then I notice in here talking about compliance with conditions as it relates to wastewater, it requires an ownership entity. Are you guys envisioning a vertical subdivision for this? And if so, what ownership entity would be responsible for compliance with those conditions?

Vertical subdivision, meaning a condominium?

Separate ownership, obviously, of the condo, but then of the hotel or the office, whichever condominium.

And it's quite possible when the development partner is placed, it's quite possible that there will be multiple forms of ownership. Either way, the stormwater responsibilities and the management of the property will be fully compliant with city code regulations.

Okay. So you'll have one entity that'll be responsible. Like, well, that's what we can do.

As of right now, right. As of right now, there is one single landowner and it's owned the property. It was the one that went through the prior iterations.

Okay. Thank you. That's all I have.

Thank you.

Any additional questions at this time? All right. With that, we will open up public hearing.

Thank you. Okay. Like last time, I'm going to list some names in the order in which the forums were received, and I'll call three up at a time. First one would be Kian Matern, then Yari Anger, and Father John Hamati.

Good morning, members of the board. I am Kian Mattern of 340 Conchdale Lane, Castlebury. I'm speaking on behalf of St. George Orthodox Church, located on the same lot as the planned construction. I'm speaking in opposition to the construction of the proposed mixed-use tower on 170 East Washington Street. Three main points. One on damage to the church, two on staging and parking, and three on the traffic effects. First point on the potential damage to St. George, the construction of the 37 story building will require the support piles. And even with an alternative installation method, still concerned about the vibrations that extend to the church. St. George is, as of this year, a 100 year old building and is registered federally as a historic building. It is integral to Orlando's history and culture. It is not likely to react positively to the construction. We're concerned that the church building will be severely damaged as a consequence of the construction. On point two of staging and parking, the street parking will be heavily filled by those working on the construction of the new building. Our parish is continuing to grow and is creating a positive impact on the community. And we already struggled to find parking for liturgies and other church events. The ingress of new personnel will lead to the availability of parking in the area to decrease. And third, on traffic, in addition to parking, a building of this size will severely impact the traffic on Ralston Avenue, which already is closed, often for parade celebrations and other city events. In summary, due especially to the expected damages to the building, I would request that the board vote to deny proposed construction. I thank you for your attention and consideration. God bless.

Thank you. RE Anger. And then Fr. John Hamati and Joshua Burgos.

Good morning, Chair of the Board and Board of Directors. It is Yari Auger, coincidentally, 4119 Blue Major Drive, Windermere. I respectfully request that the proposed 37-story mixed-use tower not be approved and should not proceed immediately adjacent to a historic church that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The issue is not aesthetics. although I will argue that, based on the renderings, it's a monstrosity and it's not attractive. The issue is the real and documented risk of irreversible physical damage to a protected historic resource, which also happens to be a multi-generational, multi-racial, and multi-ethnic beacon in the heart of the city. Construction of a high-rise typically requires deep excavation, pile driving, dewatering, heavy vibrations, prolonged soil disturbances. Historic masonry structures were not designed to withstand these forces. Even minor ground movement can cause cracking, settlement, structural instability, and permanent loss of historic fabric that cannot be replaced once it is damaged. Both federal and state laws recognize and authorize the protection of historic properties. The central question here is simple. If this project proceeds and the church suffers structural damage, cracking, settlement, or loss of historic integrity, that harm cannot be undone. A 37-story building can be constructed elsewhere. A nationally recognized historic and sacred building, may I add, once damaged cannot be recreated. Preservation of an irreplaceable historic landmark must take precedence over a development that places a landmark at substantial risk. Developers and engineers can make all the claims. Trust me, I know I'm a licensed association manager in the state of Florida. I work with developers all the time, and you know how many construction defect lawsuits that I have personally been involved in. Tons. They can say, we will be careful, we will use modern construction techniques, there will be no proof that the project will cause damages, but there's also no proof that it won't cause damage. The burden should not be on the church to prove damages and suffer the consequences after the fact. When the risk is irreversible harm to a nationally recognized historic landmark, protection, not speculation, should govern the decision. Every major construction project promises to be careful, all the promises. The issue is not intent here, it is the actual risk. The developer can replace concrete, they can replace steel, glass, they cannot replace a century of history. St. George's Church is an irreplaceable cultural asset and a non-reproducible historic resource. Commercial structures come and go. The community of St. George will have positive and lasting impact that cannot be physically seen, but trust me, in the years to come, it will have an impact that society will deeply feel and will absolutely need. I urge the board to vote no and to deny this request and protect the historic treasure that is St. George's Orthodox Antiochian Church. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

First of all, sorry about mispronouncing your name. I couldn't quite make it out on the forum. Father John Hamati, Joshua Burgos, Margarita Diaz.

My name is Father John Hammadi. Today is my 80th birthday. I'm not looking for a happy birthday, but I am saying that I have spent 50 years of my 80 years trying to protect this church. If I get emotional, forgive me, it's not because I'm 80 years old, it's because I'm so committed to this This building is a federal, state, and local landmark. But more importantly, it's a local landmark. We live here in Orlando. It is one of only three churches left that were built in the boom of 1926 and is the only one on Roslyn Avenue. When we talk about skyscape, Lake Eola, the Roslyn Club, the Metropolitan, condos, the city beautiful. If you go anywhere, you watch any local television, news programs coming to the airport, it always shows Lake Eola, and it always shows the church. And I always point it out to people, like, there, there, there. This skyscape is very, very important. You want to put up a 37-story building which I'm sorry to say because I don't want to seem prejudiced. I don't consider it attractive at all. I've seen tall buildings. I'm from New York and I've seen many of them, but I don't consider this one. I'm sure they could have done a better job, but the point is that Rosalind Avenue in reality usually begins on South Street and it goes forth until we get to Robinson. The only tall building on Rosalind Avenue is The View, but that kind of caps off the visual understanding or reality of Rosalind Avenue. We talk about proportional transition. The church becomes visibly and spatially subordinate to this building. The tallest structure in Orlando that I could find is the Sun Trace, which is 30 stories high. This building will be higher. I know the owner. I know Jason. I did have discussions with Jason before this project. I have had no discussions with him other than, hey, Jason, how are you doing? I know the owner. He's from Miami. They mentioned this and this and this and this from Miami. This is not Miami. This is not South Florida. This is Orlando. And just so that we can say that they're doing it in Miami does not mean we live here. I live here. I've been a priest of this church for almost 53, in fact, for 53 years. This proposal project would greatly increase vacant condos. The Metropolitan has already said that they are not even able to sell most of their condos because unless you have cash, they're not able to get people to get a mortgage. Development which destroys the neighborhood character only for money. As I said before, I'm from New York. I visited the Trinity Church that goes back to the Revolution. There are all these skyscrapers in New York, but none of them, none of them diminishes that Trinity Church.

We said before with the Pledge of Allegiance,

And I want to end with that. We say one nation under God. And I have to ask you, do you really mean these words? Or they're just cultural words that we no longer go by? I realize the idea of progress. I'm not against progress. But I am against the destruction of one of the few church landmarks left in the downtown core of this city. The only other two are the Trinity Lutheran Church and St. Luke's, both of which are not in Roslyn. Please, please, please vote in favor of Orlando and against this project.

Thank you. Thank you.

Joshua Burgos, Margarita Diaz, Tor Simonson. Joshua Burgos. No. Margarita Diaz.

Good afternoon. My name is Margarita Diaz, and I'm speaking on behalf of myself and Brianna Howard.

We are the... Hi, may you give us your address, please, as a requirement?

151 East Washington Street, Penhall 3C.

Thank you.

We are the owner and resident of Penthouse 3C, the unit seat directly across from the proposed 37-story suite at 151 East Washington Street. Every single window of my home face the sad footprint of this tower. I'm here to oppose this project in the strongest possible term, not because I dislike change, but because this development will destroy my home, my safety, and my financial future. Let me be absolutely clear. First, light and privacy. A 37-story wall of concrete and glass less than 100 feet from my window will block every ray of natural daylight. My home will be in permanent shadow. I will need light even at noon. Even worse, hundreds of hotel guests will look straight into my living room, my bedroom, my bathroom. The only way to have any privacy will be to keep my blinds permanently closed. My penthouse will become a sealed box. No light, no sky, no air. That is not a home. That is a cell. Second, my property value. I want to be blunt. If this tower rises, my unit becomes financially worthless. Nobody will purchase a property with zero view, zero light, zero privacy, and hotel noise just across the street. The savings I invest here, my largest asset, will be wiped out overnight. That is not a loss. That is a taking, and I will not accept it quietly. Third, and this is what worries me the most, is structural safety. I live in a historic building that was built in 1963. A 36-story high-rise required deep excavation, pile driving, a month of friendliness, vibration. I'm genuinely terrified that the ground drilling will damage our foundation. Our building was never designed to withstand such an assault. Before anything is approved, I demand an independent structure review at the developer's expense with a legally binding guarantee to cover any damage. For years of construction help, And then permanent noise, piles driving, jackhammers, dust, and diesel assault will make my home unlivable for two to three years. I will be forced out, will still pay my mortgage and high monthly HOA fee. Once the hotels opened, my reality become at 27. Mechanical home, garbage truck are done, late night bar crowd, tour buses. This is a quiet residential unit next to an industrial scale hotel operation. that is fundamentally incompatible finally the president a 37-story tower to suffocate an existing historic orlando building and crochet resident biggest biggest investment the construction of this building tell every owner downtown again you don't know you don't matter you are saying that tax revenue from a hotel is worth more than the people who already live here and pay taxes We are not a nuisance. We are human beings whose home will be destroyed. I respectfully ask you to deny this project. Do not let that tower kill our life, our peace, and our property. I will fight this with everything I have, and I am asking you today to stand on the side of the people who already call this neighborhood home. Thank you.

Thank you.

Tor Simonson, Brenda Ashley, and Cheryl Bond will be the last one.

Hello, my name is Tor Simonson. I come to you from the river. I speak for the four square, truth, freedom, love, and all that is sacred. My work encompasses the human framework. All that is free and all that is sacred is my responsibility. I want to speak briefly about the swans at Lake Eola. They are nothing but angels who are being removed from the heavenly waters, for they represent freedom, transformation and salvation. And you can go from an ugly duckling to a beautiful, graceful swan. So they are nothing but amazing grace in the language of nature. And you seek to remove them, which is blasphemy. I want you to understand that it doesn't matter if you trust in God because God no longer trusts you. I support a total moratorium on development, and if St. George needs to slay a dragon, then I'm here to support it because I come from the world of Dungeons & Dragons, and I want to know that absolutely nothing should be developed in seminal country. I do not believe development is necessary because there's plenty of commercial real estate and we don't need any more space given to anything other than the wildlife and the people to enjoy. But the environment is larger than a field. And I'm going to have to take you down a road you don't want to go. First of all, I just need to say that I'm not wearing any underwear because I'm homeless and I only have one pair of underwear. That's all I've had for about six months. This is too much information, but I'm about to share with you is too much information. Morris Troxell is a homeless veteran who killed 183 people for America. In 2004, Morris Troxell was ordered to kill children playing soccer in Afghanistan. He refused the orders by SOCOM 1 twice. Morris Troxell leaked national security documents, his shadow record to me, which I posted online and have shared with every person I can, whether it's foreign or domestic military intelligence services. Those documents are available online, so I'm basically living dead because I'm nothing more than Snowden at this point, unfortunately, which was never my choice. He doesn't want to talk about it because they've already told him they'll kill him. They'll kill his family. Morris Troxell's daughter was molested. I believe the U.S. government set up that molestation to get Morris Troxell to kill the man who molested his daughter in order to put him in jail for more than 60 years. You can check his records in Volusia County. He's being currently handled by military handlers and will not talk. I have done everything I can to try and reach out to Congressman Frost's office. I understand this sounds insane, but what I'm telling you is absolutely true. He wants to be taken into protective custody. I know that his life's in danger. My life's probably in danger, too. I've tried to get to work with people at the FBI to talk about other issues regarding national security because they are trying to plan a false flag terrorist attack in Orlando. based on a group named Tactical Shepherd run by Fernando Leonor, who is working with an NSA former operative named Ira Lambert. This all sounds, again, totally crazy, but I've told you everything I can about this. I know that, you know, they've said if you talk, maybe we'll kill you. But I say you can't make a deal with the devil because that ain't no good. So my life's one way or the other. I just got to listen to the angels, whether they're swans or not. You can follow me. I'm an initiator. I make no money from my Instagram. I've shared a story as best I can. I oppose the development. I hate the Ku Klux Klan.

Thank you. Brenda Ashley and then Cheryl Bond.

Here she comes.

Good morning, Council.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Brenda Ashley. I live at 5575 Center Lane Parkway, Orlando, Florida, 32805. I'm here today to oppose the building project that's next to the church. I'm a member of St. George Orthodox Church. I grew up in Orlando. I've been here all my life. As a little girl, I remember watching the Kayla Plaza go from Kayla Plaza to the Harley Hotel. And now it is the Metropolitan. I remember as a pregnant teenager living in the Beta House, which is down off of Magnolia, used to be next to the courthouse. I've seen a lot of development in Orlando. We already have a lot of hotels and other things going on. I remember as a little girl walking around Lake Yola, I don't even recognize Lake Yola Park anymore. I'm not going to stay very long. I love my church. I love my church family. I do believe there will be a lot of structural damage. I hear everything that the planner developers are saying and everything like that. But every Sunday when I come out of church and I look across from the back of the parking lot, I have those memories of my father working in that hotel and how much it has changed over the years. I look at it from the front. I look at the park. I look all around. Right now, there's a lot of traffic congestion everywhere. all along Roslyn Avenue and Washington Street. And I believe that it will continue to be that way with the hotel. I also love my church due to the fact that I was sick last year and I had a very severe asthma attack. I had to be hospitalized. If it wasn't for their prayers, And if it wasn't for their prayers and if it wasn't for God and a whole lot of stuff, I wouldn't have survived. We're growing as a church. We're constantly growing. People are coming and everything. But as it stands right now, there's no parking for us. And if this building is built, there will be no parking continually for us and for our guests to come in. So I'm opposed to it, and I ask everybody to oppose it and to be against it. Thank you.

Thank you.

And finally, Cheryl Bond.

Hello, my name is Cheryl Bond. I live at 151 East Washington Street, Unit 608, Orlando 32801. So as an owner in the building, the Metropolitan at Lake Eola, I'm also here as manager of the association. We have had no conversations with the developer. We would like to encourage them to to come forward and talk to our residents and our board. We would like assurances. We are a 60-year-old building. We are asking that they come forward and do a survey of our building so if there are any damages done, that we can be compensated for that. We have 128 owners. Our HOA, we do not want our current owners to have to absorb the cost of any damages that we may or may not be able to prove once this building, any building actually goes up. We're not opposed to growth, but we are concerned about property values as after the Surfside collapse, condos in Florida don't sell very well anyway. We're concerned about a lot of empty spaces over there. We're also concerned about the damage to the church. We would like to investigate legal assurance for any damages done to the Metropolitan during construction and We would invite them to come forward and meet with us and discuss. We would rather be proactive than have damages that we can't prove. I said we're not opposed to damages, but we are a small community. We have large buildings on either side of us. We have a beautiful view of Lake Eola. property values can be affected by this, and we would just like some assurances. So I am asking as owner and as caretaker of the association property that you guys, that the board deny this amendment.

Thank you. All right. That concludes our public comment. The applicant would like to respond.

Loading some visuals.

And then just switch it over to the...

Thank you so much.

Carry on. I'm doing a screen share.

It'll pop on. Eventually.

Good afternoon. Thank you again. I want to respond to each of the seven speakers. I appreciate their comments, but I additionally, and I neglected to in my opening remarks, address the chair's question regarding the bonus criteria. 58-1001, the purpose of the bonus is to provide The purpose of density and intensity bonuses is to achieve superior urban design, a greater mixture of land uses, and to encourage housing opportunities where they may not otherwise be provided by the private marketplace. What we are doing with this PD amendment is we are creating a whole new market, a luxury high-end market potential for downtown Orlando. We, the staff, and the ARB all agree that it's an exemplary product. Additionally, Under the PD zoning, and the staff report talks about this and we appreciate and concur with the competent substantial evidence and support of our requests that's in the staff report. PD is designed to allow an applicant to submit a proposal for consideration for any uses or mixture of uses and to allow the council to approve any proposal which it determines to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare, along with conditions or requirements or limitations. That's exactly what we have here. We are going to better the Western corner of Lake Eola in conjunction with what the city is already planning to do with the entrance along the end of Washington, terminus of Washington at Roslyn, which is going to be a wonderful project that they're undertaking on their own. The visuals are on DTO. This will be literally right across the street. We'll have an outdoor food and beverage component. It's going to be a wonderful compliment. Now, if I may, to the comments from the public, Number one speaker, damage staging and traffic parking. Damage, as I stated at the outset, is highly regulated. There are standards required by code required by our eventual lender designed to protect historic and sensitive structures preventatively before vibration ever reach a threshold that might cause lasting damage. Our development management partner is Sterling Project Development out of New York City. They are with me here in attendance this morning. They worked on the significant redevelopment of a 650-foot, 50-story building right across from Trinity Church, which was the church Father John referenced. So members of our project team have firsthand experience with doing exactly what we're requesting we do here. Additionally, they also help build the St. Nicholas Church, Greek Orthodox Church at Ground Zero World Trade Center site. It will not destroy the church, as Father John mentioned. Happy birthday. I have two examples. We provided these for the record. Just to further illustrate what I just explained regarding SPD's experience in this area, we have one from Canada, this is one where you have the new building going right up against the old building. It actually was able to go underneath the building. It was a headquarters for KPMG. And if I may, I wanted to focus on the other one, which is the New York City, Brooklyn example. So a real life example of a 1987 construction project that went not only next to, but underneath for KPMG. underground retail, a historic church. This is in Brooklyn, 550 Clinton, 29 story residential building went up in 2022. It's the rapidly evolving Atlantic Avenue corridor. Right next to it is an 1891 Church of St. Luke and St. Michael. And that is the new building right, adjacent to the old church. So there are many more examples, many examples of where you have old historic landmarks, which a church is adjacent to new vertical substantial construction. Further, on page 13 of the staff report, and Ms. Ng talked about this in her opening remarks, when you lay out the prior project approvals, in a way, this project is kind of coming back around to where it was on some of the prior approvals, which included stories up to 31, 28, and 19 feet. So in a way, any... indication that we may be doing something that is not of precedent has no merit. Buy right today under AC3A, which is the underlying zoning for this property, we could go 35, 40 stories tall, 400 feet without any approvals from the city other than a building permit. However, as I mentioned, we want to do the PD. We want to do the exemplary design. We want to do a landmark project that bolsters and enhances our crown of Lake Eola downtown. So I think that hits Speaker 5, Speaker 6. Speaker 4, the Metro condo penthouse owner, the way that the property sits and the orientation of the sun rises in the east, sets in the west, will not have any impact to the Metropolitan located to the north of the property. Previously, the Cambria was seven stories. Metropolitan, six stories.

In order, please.

Prior approvals... or for a building that already exceeds the height of the Metropolitan. If the board feels it's within its desires to entertain some sort of shadow study, additional condition of approval, like we did when we addressed some of the offsite concerns relative to the Father and the church, we would be happy to entertain those. I think we have close to 30 conditions of approval. One of which goes to the first speaker's comment about traffic and staging. We have to do a MOT, which is a plan. You can't just start building in downtown Orlando. So this will all be by code, all be regulated by staff. Parking, we routinely and historically for the years have provided parking on our vacant lot site, our client's vacant lot site, or the Father, or special church services. We have never said, and I'm saying now, we have never said in any way, shape, or form that we would stop that as part of this conversation about the new building. We would welcome it. In fact, there's some verbiage in the staff report about how we had reached out and not been responded to. So we're over parked. We're happy to have those conversations. Appearance of the tower, speaker two. Respectfully, staff, who's the professional expert of the city, disagrees. The ARB disagrees. We would disagree. We have expertise in this area doing these projects all over the country. I believe that's all of the... public comments. I think the last one, speaker seven was Metro Management, the condo association located to the north, just by way of getting it into the record. We also received a community association manager letter of support. from the sanctuary which was a supplement to the staff report as well the thing of it is is you don't always hear from the support people you only hear from the antis this project has support it has support within city hall it has support within the market and i'd be happy to answer any questions or anything else as we bring this to a close

Thank you. Order, please. Thank you. You had your moment to speak. All right. With that, is there any question for the applicant before he takes a seat?

Yes, I have a question. I saw that you have the parking garage, it looks like, over the shops area. Is that parking going to be strictly private for the residents and the hotel guests, or will it be open to the public?

Good question. That's to be determined when the development partner is placed to actually do the vertical construction, but it has the opportunity to be a mixture of any or all of those.

And how many parking spots are planned?

It's, well, it's a great question. I've got it here. It's 250 and zero required, right? So 250 on the positive side. Thank you. I thought you were, I'm sorry, I thought you were going about the carve out, the way we addressed the father's concerns on the view shed.

Board Member Barrett.

So the conditions provided me, the examples you provided of high rises built next to historic churches are all in areas where the soil conditions are different from the soils conditions in Florida. None of the examples relate to projects within Florida. for me to accept a project like this, I would like to see or understand more your process of how you're going to construct your piling foundation for this project. And, or, have there be some sort of concession toward the church for repairs that will be needed because the soils will create vibrations. And okay, how you put it, there will be vibrations.

Well, I appreciate the question. Condition number one is intended to address just that. There's more than one way to put pilings in the ground, as Mr. Burton explained. Whatever method we come up with will be one that's not only compliant with local city, state, Florida building, and landmark protective requirements, it'll also be vetted by the city's own professional architectural staff before we get building permits. So it's to be determined and we're not, we desire market flexibility. We want to have this project to be as open and potential as possible. If you start dealing with details like things like how you're going to, put pilings into a ground, you're limiting the potential for future partners who can come and deliver on this project. So rest assured, whatever methodology we come up with to put the pilings in the ground, it will be vetted by market, it'll be vetted by our lender, it'll be vetted by our ownership, our project management team who has experience in this specific area, the city, the state, everybody is gonna sign off on this before we put any drill in any ground.

I think following up on board member Barrett's comment, I have a question for staff. So the condition of approval indicates that the construction methods will be subject to review by the city architect. Do we have a structural engineer on staff who can review that or will it be an architect?

It would be the city's architect. We don't particularly have a structural engineer that's on staff, but obviously when you do something like this, you would have a geotechnical analysis done that would select the method of construction that would probably be reviewed as part of that analysis, if you will. So those details, while they're not before you today, those professional opinions would have to be included in such an analysis to be considered by the staff.

Yeah, I mean, I like the condition. I just was wondering if we would have the ability to have the applicant fund the city to hire a structural engineer or our own geotech as opposed to having an architect review. But I just put that out there for consideration, the same condition, but different.

Such a major project would have a geotechnical analysis associated with it. And certainly they could provide those documents to the city for review, just for verification. And Jason, do you have any additional thoughts?

No, happy. I completely agree that the geotech will be done if it hasn't already been done. And we'd be happy to prepare that and include it as part of that. And if that's an additional condition of approval, we welcome it.

And you could certainly fashion a condition with such sentiments.

Mr. Jackson?

Yeah, mine's more of a statement than a question. And I appreciate the fact that you showed those other examples of major projects that were done around historical sites, but it's often about the intent, right? So expertise, we know many things can be done, but I think at some point, you know, it's more of a statement again that you just got to, you know, sort of be a company that stands behind what you do. So it's one of those type of things that, yes, the expertise can be there to do it, but the will to do it has to be there as well. And that's just a statement I would say in general.

Thank you. Any additional questions for the applicant? Seeing none, we will close public hearing and we can bring it back to the board for deliberation. Or a motion? Or a motion?

If nobody else is hoping for a motion, I would like to propose a motion to approve the proposal with the conditions stated in the report.

I'll second that motion.

Can you repeat the motion?

Motion. Restate.

So it's a motion to approve the, and I don't have the text in front of me here, but if either you can put the text there, otherwise I'll wing it, but it's to approve the project with the conditions stated in the staff report. And I'm not proposing any new conditions, so.

I'll second that.

Just so I understand, this is a motion to approve according to the conditions in the staff report. Okay. Thank you.

All right. I'm going to vote. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed?

Nay. All right.

And the motion passes. Thank you very much. That concludes our regular agenda for the day. Other business, we'll go to appeals updates from Tim McClendon.

Mr. Tim McClendon will give an update on the different appeals that are before you today.

Yes, sir. Thank you. Tim McClendon for City Planning. We do have one appeal update for you dealing with a property at 1600 Aaron Avenue. Obviously located at 1600 Aaron Avenue. This is the former Quest site. It was looking to convert into a church. The project was heard by this board back on February 17th. It was a two-part petition. There was a GMP, Future Land Use Amendment, from public rec to residential low, as well as a rezoning to PD. Three days after that hearing, we had a neighbor appeal the project, both the legislative item, the GMP, and the rezoning. So we actually tried to line those hearings up at the same time for city council. So the QJ was actually heard back on April 23rd. We got the recommended order about 30 days later. That recommended order recommended denial of the appeal and stuck with the board's recommendation to limit the development to phase one, which allowed the church up to 200 seats. So now the legislative item, the appeal, and the QJ appeal will both be heard at city council this coming Monday on the 22nd. And whatever happens to that outcome, I'll brief you next month. And that's all I have, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. And with that, we will adjourn the meeting at 1235 p.m. Thank you very much.