Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. Good morning, everyone. We're gonna get started.

We're glad you have joined us for today's meeting. The Municipal Planning Board or an 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 07/14/2025 for approval of recommended actions. Any person desiring to appeal a recommended action of the board should observe the notice regarding appeals below.

Caution, an untimely filing by an appellant shall result in automatic denial of the appeal. Go over general rules of order for the meeting. The board is pleased to hear all nonrepetitive public comments. Large groups are requested to name a spokesperson. When you are recognized, state your name and address, direct your remark to the board, and limit your comments to three minutes per item or as set during the meeting.

When acting on items identified with the letters GMP, the board is acting in its capacity as a local planning agency pursuant to in accordance with section one six three point three one seven four Florida statutes. Items identified with One Star are legislative matters or policy setting actions that 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 5PM, Monday, 06/23/2025 to schedule an appearance before the city council in accordance with chapter two, 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 of board of county commissioners of Brevard County versus 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 new hearing before an independent hearing officer in accordance with provisions of chapter two, 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 5PM, Tuesday, 06/24/2025. There is a $500 nonrefundable fee for this appeal. The MPB recording secretary may be re reached at betsy.brown@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 the 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. Madam secretary, do we have a quorum today?

Yes.

Thank you. And I'll call this meeting to order at 09:04AM, and please stand for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America,

Alright. In consideration of the May from our last meeting, we actually have a clarification to make. So on the item number three from last month, the wetlands code amendment, A motion was made by board member Barrett based on some comments by board member Drury and Baldacci. In that motion, we didn't get the the direction recorded accurately, so we're gonna go over that and see if everyone agrees, make a motion, and then and we can move on past that. So the clarification on that is that we need to note that the staff needed to make a slight modification of of the wording of the motion made by the board member Barrett referencing board member jury's desired conditions to be added to LDC two thousand twenty five one zero zero one.

The motion referenced a 25% buffer zone limit and not the distinction of clearly granting a reduced buffer zone when the three identified circumstances were present. So the minutes under consideration for the board today provide that clarification, and I'll ask if either board member Drury or Baldacci have any comment. If that seems accurate, we can make a motion to approve that to the minutes.

I that

sounds accurate. Yes.

Have a script of exactly what's gonna go in there. I'll I'll read it again. So the motion the motion referenced a 25% buffer zone limit and not the distinction of clearly granting a reduced buffer zone when the three identified circumstances are present. If we need staff to go over what those circumstances were for memory, we can do that.

No. I I think the point was to have some flexibility so staff could have use their common sense and and and, you know, make that decision. So, yeah, that's that was the intent.

Tim, do you have any color to to add to that at all? Clear? Yes. If everyone's in agreement, we can make a motion to approve the updated minutes regarding item number three from the May.

So I'll make a motion that we waive the reading of the minutes and that we approve the minutes with the changes noted by the chairman.

Second.

Alright. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.

Alright. In accordance with section two eight six point zero one one four Florida statutes, any member of the public can be heard on any matter before the board today. In the item 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 what item when discussed in the regular agenda. Please complete a speaker request form on orlando.gov forward slash public comments.

For those of you joining in person who would like to provide a public comment for any item on the agenda, please fill out a speaker request form and hand it to the board secretary. For those of you joining virtually, use the raise hand feature and turn on your camera or dial 9 on the phone to request to speak when prompted. We have one announcement today. Just a reminder to please fill out your financial disclosure forms that are due July 1. And with that being said, we can move on to the consent agenda.

Thank you, mister chair. First time on the consent agenda this morning is identified as Anthem Orlando. The applicant is Michael with Loud and Proud Ventures. It's located at 100 North Orange Ave. It's identified as CUP2025Dash10005, and this is a conditional use permit to continue a nonconforming use or a nightclub within the downtown entertainment area.

And the recommended action is deferral of the request to 07/15/2025 MPB meeting. We did not receive any comments. If there are any participants online, please raise your hand if you wanna talk about this project. Seeing none. Item two is Major Boulevard hotel amendment. The applicant is Michael Marshall with Nelson Mullins. It's located at 5600 Major Boulevard. This is a two part project. The first case is CUP 2025Dash10012. This is a conditional use permit for mechanical parking.

And the second part of the project is NPL twenty twenty five dash one zero zero one two. This is master plan amendment to change the use for multifamily residential to 17 story hotel with 349 rooms, including an intensity bonus of 2.5 to allow for a floor area ratio of four point o. Recommended action is approval of the request subject to the conditions in the staff report. If you have any questions or comments on this case online, please raise your hand now. Saying none.

Moving on to the airport commerce center warehouse. The applicant is Zara b with Barrios Engineering. This is located at 9197 Boggy Creek Road. This is a master plan MPL twenty twenty three dash one zero zero four eight. This is a master plan approving the framework for a future phased warehouse project.

The recommended action is deferral of the request to the 07/15/2025 NPB meeting. I'll ask for raised hands on Zoom if you wish to talk about that. Saying none. Item four is a p o AIPO warehouses track 26.1 And 26.2. The applicant is Chris Tatum with Prologis.

It's located at 2199 Trayport Drive. This is case number MPL2025Dash10015. This is master plan for two warehouses. Both sizes are 106,000 square feet and 116,000 square feet. And as of last night, this recommended action has changed.

This is a deferral of the request to 07/15/2025 at MPB meeting. I'll ask for any raised hands on Zoom if you wish to talk about that project. Seeing none, the last case is case five. This is Shoal Shoal Creek Drive to Amanda Adams Drive Street name change. City of Orlando is the applicant.

This is located at Shoal Creek Drive, North Of Butler National Drive and South of Lee Vista Boulevard. This case is SNC2025Dash10000. This is a change the street name from Shoal Creek to Amanda Adams Drive, and the recommended action is approval of the request subject that to the conditions in the staff report. Now ask for any comments or raised hands for that case online. Dang. None.

Alright. So we have no items on the regular agenda today. I'll bring it back to the board if you'd like to discuss any items on the consent agenda or entertain a motion.

I'd I'd like to discuss item two.

Declare a conflict. Sorry. Sorry about that.

Yeah. I wanna I want to discuss item two.

Alright. So item two, Major Boulevard hotel amendment. Will we move to the regular agenda? And then, yes, any conflicts?

Yes. I need to declare a conflict on item number four. My employer, Greenberg Trawig, represents the, applicant and the owner.

Alright. So we'll move to the regular oops. Sorry. Make a motion on the remainder of the consent agenda.

Approval of consent agenda.

Alright. We have a motion from board member Brown. Do we have a second?

Second.

Alright. And so that is a motion for items one three four five. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. All those opposed? And the consent agenda passes unanimously. So we will jump to regular agenda to discuss item number two, Major Boulevard Hotel Amendment. Would you like a staff report or just ask a question?

No. Actually, I Sean doesn't have to go through everything. My question is related to the intensity bonus and specifically how they're qualifying for the intensity bonus and what they are doing in order to achieve the bonus. It wasn't it wasn't clear in the staff report, and I just wanted to understand that.

Yeah. So in our code, we have our intensity bonus criteria, and that is that we've 10% of the gross floor area has to be a secondary use. They provided us a calculation of their phase one and their projected phase two together. Each individually and together, they do meet that 10% bonus criteria.

Okay. So what was the what was the secondary use?

Retail and restaurant. Retail. Retail.

1st Floor retail. Top and restaurant. Okay. Alright. I'll go with it.

I just as a matter for future consideration as we're and I've only got one more meeting on the board, so I can I can say this? I I think in the case of a hotel, a restaurant space to count as secondary use in order to achieve a bonus is like probably allowed by the letter of the code, but like I don't think that's anything that you normally wouldn't do in a hotel. So but you know, as as things get revised in the future, I would consider that. So Okay. Go ahead.

So they've so they've met so they're do they then have do they have restaurant and retail on floors other than the 1st Floor?

I believe it's just the 1st Floor.

Because the 1st Floor was only, like, 7,000 feet, and it's, like, a 189,000 square foot building. So Yeah. Can we

get the applicant up here

to Yeah.

To start with development program.

Hey, Mike. Good to see you

as well. Thank you. Yes. Hi. Good morning. My name is Michael Marshall with Nelson Mullins. The restaurant is a rooftop restaurant. It's ground floor retail and rooftop restaurant.

Gotcha. Okay. Thank you. So while yeah. While while you're here so that Sean doesn't have to do it, so as part of the code then, you have to commit to certain other things in order to to achieve the bonus. So what are the what are the other elements that you're doing to get the bonus?

So if you go through the criteria, you know, this is in the Metropolitan Activity Center. Right? It's the outside the downtown. Right? It's your most dense. It's it's where you have your highest intensity. It's where you have your most compact development. It's where you are you have lots of lots of theme parks, entertainment venues that obviously are drawing people. And so you need to be able to and that's why it's so dense and intense is that you have to be able to support all of those entertainment uses in that district. And so you so first and foremost, I mean, it is where to the extent you have FAR bonuses in your code, this is where it is meant to be directed. You're following growth.

Yeah. And I can I can save you some time because I don't I don't have an issue with that? My question is in that section of the code there are some specific things that you have a menu of things that you can do in order to if you qualify for the bonus, which you qualify. Right. There's a menu of things that you can do, and I just wanted some clarity on what things from that menu you were doing because it wasn't in the staff report. That's all.

Right. Well, I mean, it's it's a you know, it is a mixed use. The the criteria is at first, you know, you look to see whether or not it's, you know, that it's it's adequate. Like, you have concurrency. Right? You've got an infrastructure. It's so it's served by services. It is providing a mixed use product. That's one of the bonuses that one of the criteria is to look for is the mixed use product. It's providing you know, it's located within walking distance of transit. It's located within you know, it's it's served by other modes of transportation. It, you know, it it happens to be in a place that benefits from a lot of the built environment and its context. It's not as if though this project itself has to deliver those synergies and internalization that happens in this compact development. It sort of fits that pattern. And for that reason, you know, it checks the boxes.

It's it's consistent with the comp plan. It meets all the bulk regulations. It meets all of your parking requirements. So it, you know, it it really is. It's while, you know, it's a bonus and it's subject to criteria, in this case, it's not much of a stretch, I guess, is the one I'm looking for. The primary I mean, again, it it the the primary metric is looking for is to provide the mix of uses. Otherwise, it where it sits, I mean, it sits in a context where the bonus is appropriate. So I I I believe there are only, like, four criteria.

So you're not doing any of the design enhancements in fifty eight eleven o four?

Well, we I don't have the architects here with me, but I know at this point, know we do have conditions, which, again, we're we're fine with all of the conditions of approval. There are architectural conditions, so there are still architectural drawings that have to be reviewed by the appearance board. We we don't we don't have a full set of architectural drawings here. If there are specific architectural features you're looking for, then, obviously, we're open to that. But there are some conditions that are in the development order now that address things like a varied roofline, looking for, certain aesthetics on the skin of the building, which we're we're fine with doing. If there's anything in particular, obviously, we're open to it. But we we don't have full architectural drawings yet because we're not at that point.

Gotcha. Okay. I I have another question then for appreciate your No problem. Your input. I have another question for staff then.

So in order to in order to get the bonus, all you have to do is do the 10%. You don't have to do any design you don't have to do any of the design enhancements listed in 11 o four or any of that.

Yeah. I I believe you do. I can I have the

sections pulled up?

Yeah. So I'll just read fifty eight eleven o four design enhancements. The following design enhancements represent options for creating a superior development. While not a strict point based system, a development that meets a greater number of these enhancements is eligible for a greater bonus than a development that meets only one or two enhancements. If improvements to the street streetscape or other public property is part of a selected option, then such improvements must be maintained by the property owners or owners of the subject development unless appropriate maintenance obligations are accepted by the city.

There is a list of them. I'll just go over the first few words of each. So streetscape treatment that exceeds the minimum standards normally required, landscaping that exceeds by at least 10% of the minimum number of points required, at least one additional mobility strategy, site design and building materials that exceed the minimum environmental sustainability requirements in place at the time of development. For a high rise building, a roofline that's sculpted to create an interesting form and enhance the collective skyline. Superior superior architectural design, including all of the following where applicable.

Buildings like corner lots and buildings that terminate views must incorporate additional height or other features that emphasize the prominent location. In mixed use buildings, the ground floor must be different differentiated from upper floors through the use of architectural treatments. The building entrance must be a prominent feature that is designed and articulated with pediments, pilasters, columns, porticos, porches, overhangs, railings, and other architectural elements. Going further, underground utilities are currently above ground. Parking garage is located such that it is interior to the site or lined with habitable space along the street facing facades.

So right off the bat, I've I'm in land development. I'm not in urban design. But right off the bat, I can already see two. The parking garage is interior, and the Top Floor has been renovated and changed to look architecturally different.

So yeah. And I'm not I don't wanna put you in the position of having to, you know, review things on their plan and say this does or doesn't meet. Because typically if you were asking for a bonus, you would say we we meet this and this and this. Or we if if you're if you're not far enough along in design to have specifics, would say we will meet these these things. Mhmm.

And so I I would just for for discussion for the board, I would be very interested in understanding which ones they, they would meet so that we could then consider if that was enough to justify the bonus that they're asking for. Okay. So that's that's that's kind of how the process should should work. Right. And, you know, nothing's nothing nothing would stop you from coming back with a with a plan or vision to say, okay.

We've done design and now we can do, you know, five or six of these instead of one or two of these. And I mean, because this is this is allowing them to go from 2.5 to four, which or from 1.5 to four One point five. Which is which is, like that that's a pretty significant bump that that we're giving them.

We did have a a development program submitted that showed the calculations of what was retail and what was restaurant. I did not attach then the staff report, unfortunately, but I I am trying to find it within the case file.

Did you Well, if I if I if I may. I mean, I appreciate everything you say. Yeah. It so we can look if you look at the conditions I mean, there are a number of things. And, again, it I mean, if there are other specific architectural features, more than happy to listen to them. You know, some of the things that it talks about trying to get them. So street state treatment. No problem. You know, if there's any particular streetscape you need, any type of landscaping, that's no problem. You know, we are providing when it talks about building materials and sustainability, you know, we are providing sustainable building materials.

We are reducing the amount of vehicular storage space. In other words, we're not maximizing, we're mechanical parking so that we could be more efficient. We're not building, you know, parking structures. Parking structure spaces are extremely expensive, and they take up a lot of bat mass and bulk. And so, you know, we are effectively reducing that in half almost. So it's you know, we're that's very environmentally friendly. It it's, we we are and as far as architectural design, it it is a mixed use building. We are differentiating the upper floors from the lower floors. Actually, we have three levels that are being differentiated architecturally. These are all in the conditions in section I guess, the urban design section of the, of the development order.

We we have enclosed dumpster spaces. We have, the, again, the landscaping. We have the, the requirements for the, let's see, the pedestrian entrances have to be, we have we need shelter like a like a portico share or portico, the and that's what's mentioned in in condition number two as far as far as architecture is concerned. I so, again, if there's you know, we haven't we haven't been through a full architectural review and urban design review. So if there are specific menu items, again, we're not we're not here to say we won't do them, but the the ones that have been discussed so far, we've haven't had any issue with. So if there's something in particular, then please let us know.

Yeah. Thank you for that. And, Rick, before we get into your question, I see your hand up there. I'd like to I'd like to get the presentation opened up. I think it's valid for everybody to kinda be on equal footing here and go through now that you've provided a lot of input, we've we've heard board member jury's concerns. I think the the actions and attitude of of kind of the criteria that needs to be met for density bonus is consistent with how this board has behaved.

So And and and, Fortisworth, the, you know, the the second building that's discussed has to come back to you guys. So it it this isn't the only time we'll be before you on this on the build out of this project. We will have to be back before you again. So That's fine. Yeah. Sure.

Yeah. So for this phase one, we're only acknowledging well, we're acknowledging the second phase, but this is in no way a review or an approval of the second phase. For the first phase, we are requiring that they come back for a final site plan, which in that we can look even closer at the exact square footages that are on the site plan. And the second phase will also have to come back to municipal planning board and then a following final site plan as well. Yes. I apologize that those calculations weren't in the staff report.

No. That's that's okay.

Would you mind going through the presentation?

Yeah. I just wanna point out that since this was on a regular agenda, I don't have a PowerPoint presentation, but I can just present staff report. Alright. I'm sharing it if it could be put on the top screen. Thank you.

So here's a site, a bit of that pie shaped site on Major Boulevard. So the Futureland uses Metropolitan Activity Center, so is the AC 3 zoning district. So the applicant is requesting to amend the previously approved master plan to change the proposed use from residential condom condominiums to hotel. Specifically, the proposal will change from a single phase 174 unit 16 story single condominium tower with a ground floor commercial, to a 349 room, 17 story, single hotel tower with ground floor commercial, rooftop restaurant, structured parking, mechanical parking within that structured parking, which is the conditional use permit aspect, and the possibility of a future separate second phase hotel. So, yep, it is being increased from 1.5 to four point o, that bonus.

It's meeting all setbacks and billing height requirements and ISR requirements. So the a C three zoning district has a maximum permitted floor area ratio of 1.5. The applicant is requesting an intensity bonus in conformance with the land development code. The total maximum floor area ratio including the bonus is four point o. With the requested bonus, the proposed development may be allowed a total of 303,372 square feet of nonresidential development floor area.

The applicant is proposing a 189,954 square feet of nonresidential floor area for phase one, a total of two hundred and forty four nine hundred and fifty four square feet, including the future phase two. Section fifty eight one one zero three requires that the proposed development meet the criteria for approval of a bonus. The app can propose to meet these criteria by providing approximately 10% or 17,791 square feet of the proposed floor area as ground floor retail. Future phase two, as stated before, will individually and combined meet this criteria as well. I can scroll down to the site photos.

So here's the previous site plan that went to the board last year as a condominium. Here's the new site plan, very similar. You can see in that gray outline, that's future phase two, which, again, we're not actually reviewing and approving this time. So we do have Floor 1. It is rotated, but we have our retail options at the bottom.

I can't do the math that fast, but retail number one is 3,875. Retail number four is 3,129. There is a lobby. There is retail number two here, which is not listed, but it was provided in the overall development plan. Here's the elevation.

I'll go down to the renderings. Let me see if I could zoom out. Yeah. The main difference with this tower versus the one that was approved last year is the addition of the top floor. I don't have the previous rendering of the condominium tower, but the top floor is a little more architecturally defined, and that's where the restaurant would go.

And then you can see the retail at the bottom and the loading pickup zone. This is just the rear side and the side rear and the front side with a little bit of that phase two shown. It's the existing Cyan, and we are down to our conditions.

Thank you. I'd like to to bring it back to the to the board for any comments. I'll start with board member Baldagi.

Yeah. Thank you, mister chair. No. I I think the project is appropriate. The density is appropriate. I'll it meets all the you know, tick checks all the boxes per se. I I guess and I'm just a dirt engineer, so don't take me as an architect. But these are only black and white, so it's kinda hard to, you know, get the sense of what the building looks like. The first floor looks great. The second the Top Floor looks great.

I just wonder if there's more that could be done with the main you know, the that that's 70 that's a big wall that, at least on these, just looks kind of stark, you know, the same. So if if there's something that can be done with articulation, I don't know if anybody put balconies on anymore. If if there's anything that could be done, because to me, that's part of the negotiation for the density bonus to to Blake's point. So and I'm not an architect. I'm not trying to tell you what to do with it, but that would be my only thought.

Do I weigh You it adding fenestration to the building is really it's I'm sure, you know, it's not an that's not an issue. And I do appreciate what Sean said. This is you know, the previous multifamily building isn't measured by FAR. Right? It's units per acre. So this building and that building are pretty much the same. Right? It's the same bulk scale. We added the top floor because we wanted to add the restaurant use. And so we feel like it's improved the building.

If there are other improvements that can be made on the building facade, more glazing, then, you know, again, it's this isn't I mean, you know, no one's wedded to this exact this black, like you say, this black drawing. So, it it it and and the second building, you know, will come back before you as well. So, if there's something that can be articulated now, I would appreciate that too because we could build that in for the second building.

My feeling is just to put that thought out there for staff. I I don't wanna try to be an architect up here. Just put the comment out there. Mhmm. I like the project. That's all for me.

Michael, what's the what's the FAR of that of that building that we're looking at?

The the first one is around a 2.8 or something like that. Hang on a second. It has to do that.

And if we have any more urban design questions, we do have Jacob Ballard from urban design ready to answer.

Thank you. We may we may get into that.

Think it's around a three. It's around 75% of overall floor areas in the first building. I mean, for this

That's that's that's close enough. I was trying to figure out if this was the 1.5 and then you were going on top of it, but this is with some portion of the bonus and then the other portion of bonus would be in the other building in phase two. Okay. Right.

Sean, if you don't mind, can you go back to the site plan with the with the phase outlined on it? So I think I think part of the difficulty, even if we get into I'm not gonna get into specifics and dig into urban design to to a great degree. I think the difficulty is that the phase one site plan I I don't have any problem with the the building. I think that there could be additional comments on that in in terms of fenestration. I think the Ground Floor looks good.

I you know, where does the front entry address? That would be a a question that I would wanna know. Where are the streetscape enhancements? How is this if you wanna call it a block of development, how is that enhancing the public realm? And then there's and then you double down on that and you go, there's gonna be an additional building that's not approved in this.

There's gonna be another master plan that we can review, but that's also going to impact the urban design of the site. And we don't know how it's serviced, and the site plan doesn't really show us that. And I I it doesn't it doesn't appear to have a lot of detail in an upgraded urban realm at the Ground Floor. I think the building has the capability. I think the Ground Floor looks like it would check the boxes as it pertains to the architecture, but I don't see it in the urban design.

And again, if it gets an approval here, the FAR gets to go up, but we don't actually know what's going to happen in phase two in that master plan, how all it's going to come together and check some of these other boxes that can be utilized, not necessarily required, but a good number of them have to be utilized to to get that bonus. So I think some articulation on how this enhances the public realm would be an advantage to make everyone feel comfortable moving forward, a more complete vision.

Right. Well, one could I I may offer. We I don't think there's any problem we could agree to add landscaping along the the street frontage. If it's a 10% increase, whatever the code requirements are, then we could just have that as a stipulation in the condition. I think a lot of this relates to the fact that the first really, the what's new from this plan and the one that was already approved is the second building has to come back to you anyway.

Right? And so I'm wondering if the FAR bonus doesn't make sense now today for the first building. And then whenever the second building comes back, it too comes with a traditional FAR bonus at that time so that you don't feel like that you have that hanging out there, if that makes sense to you all. And then, you know, if there there are a number of LINX bus stops nearby. I don't know if there's one that touches this property. I don't believe so, but I believe they're they're in the public right of way. I'm not sure if they're sheltered. The one that's nearest, if it doesn't have a shelter, then, obviously, that's something that could be provided that's a that's a public benefit, provide a shelter bus stop there, or to refurbish one if it is currently sheltered. So that whatever the nearest one is. I don't think it's on their property, but if it's in the right of way, then that's something that we can still help you address.

If it's on someone else's property, it's a little different. Right? But I believe they're in the right of way.

Thank you. No. I appreciate it. Mean, there's a lot of ideas and capability and opportunity for how this may meet a ton of the categories. And I think you're right. The context of this site, you're investing in a site that is in a central zone to activity, so it has the capability of checking a lot of boxes inherently. But I think the site has to behave a little bit more accepting to the outside context to check the box. I think the opportunities are there and you're listing them. But I think a more holistic vision, like if we had a full site plan today with both buildings outlining what the phases are, that that kinda complete the idea of how this checks all the boxes, I think that there'd be not a lot of conversation today. Right.

I think that we have one that focuses on phase one, shadows in a box for phase two, although the entire site is benefiting from the four o FAR, but we don't have a complete vision on what that might be.

Yeah. We can bifurcate that if that makes you all more comfortable today. That's not a problem.

I mean, for instance, you know, like, how how does a pedestrian access phase two?

Exactly. It's all those questions. That's why, you know, there's a lot of nuance to get into, and I I don't know that we can solve that today. I think I don't think that's our job. I think you've got design team that can address those comments. But I'd like to leave the comment there for now. I know we have some other questions here, so I'll I'll leap over to board member Kendrick Schrader.

Thank you. Yeah. I think one thing that would be helpful perhaps on the phase two master plan, it sounds to me like really what the board wants to see is if we're going to the higher level of the density bonus, if we could just have some guidance based on the code criteria and have that set forth for us just so we rather than us trying to figure everything out up here, if there is criteria in order to go to the higher end of the bonus, then please just list that out and let us know what's going to happen so we have it in front of us to evaluate when we make our decision.

And I think at the end of the day, it's actually a quite simple exhibit, right? You have a site plan that addresses both buildings at full build out. You have a keyed list that says we're adding this, this, this, this, this, and that meets the criteria of this code to get the density bonus. So it's not a, relatively, it's not a huge lift. And if the second building is gonna look architecturally similar or complementary to the first one, I think, that we can imagine, but it would help to see the second building in massing as well. Right. K.

Yeah. It's it's you know, it for what it's worth, mean, again, you know, we we we are fine with streetscape treatment exceeding minimum standards if that needs to be articulated more clearly in the conditions of approval. You know, again, additional mobility strategy. I don't know how many mobility strategies here work other than rubber wheel transit, but like I said, we'll help improve the nearby transit stop in that regard. You know, the it's site design and building materials that exceed minimum environmental sustainability requirements.

If that you know, that's a condition, then we're okay with that. Superior architectural design. Well, for the high rise building, the roofline that's sculpted to create interesting form, believe that's already a condition in the development order. I I guess superior architectural design as far as, you know, mixed use buildings. It is a mixed use building with the ground floor. It's differentiated from the upper floors. The primary building entrance is a prominent feature. If if you want a larger portico, then, you know but we had there is one that's proposed. There is a sheltered entrance. You know, the parking garage is located interior.

We're doing that. Other enhancements not otherwise required by code such as public art or premium transit stop again while we talked about the transit. So I feel like that we're checking a lot of these from section 11 o four. And, again, the building this this building was already approved. Actually, it was a less attractive building when it was just multifamily.

So it may make most sense then to just, like I say, with the FAR bonus, we're coming back anyway for the second building, to just leave that bit of the FAR for then, and we just deal with this building now. Because I I do believe it's an improvement over the building that's already approved. I do believe we check a lot of these boxes. And so but I also appreciate, you know, everything you're saying. And, you know, in working with urban design, you know, sometimes that's it's hard to do in a public hearing, you know, because you do need to sit down with designers and and work through.

But if you all are comfortable with your designers and urban designers, I mean, we're more we we we enjoy working with your staff. It's a great staff. And so, you know, obviously, if there whatever conditions that you want to add to the to the development order in addition to what we have now, it's it's you know, we we we appreciate everything you're saying. You know? It's we just didn't think that this was a place that we're gonna go through urban design, especially for a building that was effectively already approved. We're just changing the use in it. And so instead of being large condominium units, you've got smaller, you know, hotel rooms. But the hotel rooms, we believe, serves a better function in this location given its surrounding context. You you don't have to worry about, like, how do these how do kids get to school from here? You know, this does go help us serve, you know, all the tourists and and theme park attractions you have in the area.

So so if if I if I may just respectfully submit that we we would like to get through this at least on the first building. We know we're coming up for the second building anyway, and we can we can address the FAR bonus for that building then as you know, if you prefer.

Thank you. I I appreciate the the input there and reactions. I think, you know, I think there's a there's ways you can cut it. And if you desire to do that, I think that that amends what you're you're asking for here a little bit. But I I also think that, you know and it would take a month to come back, right, because that's the dates, but it it would take within that time period to put together a plan that addresses all of the concerns that shows us how you're meeting all the things that you listed that you that you have an opportunity to do. And then you got it all. Right? You got you got the four o, and everybody agrees that you'll come back for a a phase two, and we move on. So I don't you're not far off. And I believe that you have all those items, but that that's kinda where I am.

I'm gonna leave over to board member Drury, who will leave his hand up. Yeah. And I don't I don't

know if we're in the if if we're in the discussion phase or if we're still asking questions. I'm I I the thing that I think is critical about this and you know, there's a lot of projects that come through here that we just sort of give the rubber stamp to and they move on. This is a case where if you zoomed out of this site, number one, you'd see a whole bunch of buildings in the middle of a whole bunch of parking lots. Number two, those buildings would generally be hotel buildings. So from that perspective, it makes total sense to build a hotel here.

Less than a quarter mile away Bainbridge just did a multi family building, or a multi family project, right? This was a multi family project and so the comparison of the building to the building may be very similar, but the use is very different especially from the case of what you're trying to do with AC 3. And so when I said like calling this a mixed use building because it's got a restaurant in it and some retail that's you know 500 feet away from the street, like it doesn't it doesn't really meet that intent for how you would for for what that bonus is supposed to be. I'm willing to give some leeway for that because the site itself, the kind of pie shape of the site, you can't really put a building up to the to Major Boulevard. And frankly, you know, I don't know that that the city has made investments in Major Boulevard to make it a street that you would want to put up against.

So I guess all that being said, I feel like the request for bonus, because it is a hotel among a bunch of other hotels, we need to be very clear about what they're gonna give for that. And we need to, I think, put some guardrails on it so that it doesn't just turn out to be, you know, another 150,000 feet of something that's, you know, frankly pretty mediocre architecture in a spot where, like, there's some old mediocre architecture, but a lot of the new stuff is actually kind of interesting. So I I think that, you know, they're asking for a lot. I'm not opposed to giving them a lot. I think they need to give something significant for it.

Alright. Do you all have any additional comments or responses there? We're we're gonna move to board discussion, after this.

Well, all all I'll say is I, really, I appreciate, I appreciate I I look. I've I've been on boards like what you all are doing before, and I know everyone's trying to achieve a desired outcome. Right? We wanna build outcome that is we're proud of. So I so I appreciate what you're doing and where you're coming from.

I I I guess my ask is just to make sure that we understand, like because it it it doesn't sound like to me it's so much the the category items as it is the specifics of what it looks like. Right? Which is in in some ways, I feel like I I don't wanna I don't wanna put our team in, like, where we're feel like we're just swinging in the dark, you know, hoping that we can, like, present something that that that subjectively meets the eye more so than, you know, what what is it? Is is there any way to be that you can give us some, like, specificity. Are you looking for more glazing?

Do you, you know like I said, did you want the building oriented differently to address the street different? And you're right. I appreciate everything you said. We I I thought as well about having more of the street frontage, have more of the, you know, pedestrian entrances, you know, so longer street frontage. But it's tricky with the with the with the site and the shape of it because now you've got this weird triangle that's behind the building.

I what do you do with that, and how do you how do you circulate? And so, but it's if if there is something that that you could help us with specifically like that, then then I would appreciate that. But, obviously, we'll do everything we can to to try to meet the code criteria and to try to make you all happy because, again, I I appreciate what you at the end of the day, it's what you look and see that matters. And so I I don't want to we don't wanna deliver something that you all won't be proud of. So, again, if there's any way you could just help us maybe with like, sit there, no particular things, I guess, is all I'm saying.

Thank you. Thank you for that that input. We'll bring it back to the board to discuss and and articulate those thoughts. We may make some statements that that give guidance or or result in a motion.

Okay. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you, Sean. Alright.

One second before we get started. Richard Forbes, the appearance review official in the Urban Design Studio. I just wanted to elaborate on that that this will be coming back for our appearance review, and we will be looking at all those things that you guys are talking about at that point. But like I said, this is a bit schematic in this stage.

So can I ask Richard a question? Sure. Is that is that appropriate? Thank you very much for for that. When in a case like this, when it comes to ARB, if there's been a bonus attached to the project for, you know, my my favorite words in the entire land development code, superior architectural design.

If if that's been a if a bonus has been attached or if if a bonus has been given because of superior architectural design, do you all have a higher bar that you would apply or are there so like, do you do you look at it and you're like, alright, that primary building entrance is prominent, but it could be more prominent. Like, how how much how much leeway and flexibility do you have versus how much do we need to specify, things that that need to be included?

Well, of course, the more specificity you put on something, the easier it is to do the appearance review at the end of the day. However, it should remain flexible so that that staff can work with the applicant to come up with the best possible design solution. But we're not we're we won't be just settling for whatever is the, you know, least common denominator. Let's put it that way. So if it requires superior design, then we're gonna be looking for something that is more

special. More superior. More yeah.

Okay. Thank you.

So can I ask a question too?

Yeah. Absolutely.

Richard, is that so when when is that review? Is it so this case will go to the city council, and then is that reviewed during their final their construction permits, or when is that review?

That review is typically done during the permitting process or just before. So that they've they've gotten a little bit farther in their design phase so that we can actually see what's going to be, proposed to be

And is that, is that a recommendation? Like, how much teeth does your group have? And is that just a recommendation?

No. It's not just a recommendation. They'll have to provide, you know, whatever staff determines is the appropriate, you know, architectural solution that is higher in quality.

Okay. That that thank you. Because and that I I just I don't feel it's we would be well suited to negotiate architectural features up here. And I certainly don't wanna send him back for a month and come back and be in the same position. So my feeling is we've kinda given our thoughts to staff and let them implement it. We're setting the policy. They implement the details, and we should have faith in our staff to do that.

Yep. So I I'm I would I would be comfortable well, numb number one, we can we can talk about whether or not we include phase two or or not. I I would be comfortable as a as as a requirement for design enhancements if we said that it's from fifty eight eleven o four a b e f g and h. And again, I mean, they're they're asking for, like, the biggest bonus you can get. They need to give a lot.

And so I think so a is streetscape, b is more than 10% landscape, e is sculpted roofline, which it sounds like you're on your way to, F is all of the, materiality as well as placement and articulation, for superior architectural design. G is underground utilities and h is the parking garage. I don't know that that exceeding the minimum environmental sustainability requirement is something that probably we need to get into. And I also don't think that given the context that there's a mobility strategy, there's additional mobility strategies that could be applied. But if if we think there are, I'd be interested in hearing that.

So that's that's I would say that, you know, that would that seems appropriate for what they're asking for.

I agree. So your comment your comment is to outline and and have them commit within within the approval to set list of items per code. Right?

And then when it comes to Richard and and ARB, they they have as much That's as much as I think to Rick's point, that's as much as I think we need to be to be doing and, you know, then get it in their hands and they can they can be the arbiters of it when it comes back.

I'll make it faster.

Do one more one more comment. I would like to bring it back to the board.

I just want to assure you that we are the last thing I wanna do is come back with with this second building and and be embarrassed about what happened on the first one. So I just want you all to know that we are committed to doing our level best at delivering. So I I just I I, you know, I this I I can't I can't give you, like, something signed that says that, but you but please know that coming back for a second building, coming back before you all is not something that's gonna be easy to do if we haven't done our job on the first one. And I've done this long enough to know that, you know, that's it's just not a good means of practice. So I just wanna make sure you all, you know, understood that and that we were genuine about that.

Under thank you.

I I

just wanna make you understand that I think what we're headed towards is to give Richard's team a little more specificity based on those code sections. And so you'll be working with Richard's team to try to meet those items. Right?

Agreed. Board member Reid.

Maybe

a question. In terms of the ARB, I mean, that would be going to ARB regardless of the density bonus. Correct?

Just to clarify. The the ARB, the appearance review board, is only for things within the Downtown CRA. This is what this is going to go through what we call an appearance review approval, which is does not go to that appearance review board because it's only it's only jurisdiction is within the Downtown CRA. But it's a similar kind of it it's staff, in the urban design department interpreting the the plans and you making recommendations for how it's gonna be a superior

design. It would go through that process regardless of the density bonus. Correct?

Correct.

So I think what we're trying to add on is, like you said, Blake, the things that we feel like are over and above what, you know, what they should be doing to achieve that or to justify that density bonus. So that's my only comment.

Alright. So for board discussion and just to kinda level set where we are. Right? You know, I think that the overwhelming comment here is, you know, putting a little bit of guidance, formal direction, and and record of the items that are being addressed to qualify for the density bonus as set by the the parameters and code. I think we generally agree with that.

I'd like to hear more from the the rest of the board. I know this has been a conversation really engaging about now five five of us, so roughly half the board. So if we may, I'd like to open it up to discussion and get thoughts from from the group here. Entertain a motion. I think that, you know, we have we're starting to get into the direction of emotion from what board member Drury has suggested in identifying specifics, and a lot of that is related to the applicant's suggestions that they that they could meet certain standards.

So I I don't think anything's outside of the the wheelhouse of what has conceptually been mentioned. And, again, I think what's what's missing here is a commitment to those items. And I think I think we can head in that direction, discuss it, and come up with a with a motion here. And for the record, have no issue with, personally, with with the phase two portion of it. I think anything that gets set here in clarity could solve that moving forward so it would adhere to the same the same comments that we've had here today. And I think that's I think that's beneficial to the to the applicant as well. So open it up if anybody has any comments, direction, also entertain a motion if we're there.

So I'll if if there's no discussion, I'll make a motion unless Phil was gonna I'll I'll make a motion that we approve it subject to the conditions in the staff report with an additional approval that the master plan must reflect I'm never good at talk at thinking out loud. Master plan must reflect

So condition set per code x x x x x, whatever.

Yeah. The the the master plan must include design enhancements consistent with section 58.11 o four subsection a, b, e, f, g, and h.

That's it. I'll second for discussion purposes because I I just it's the wording. I'm not is it the mass the master plan we're approving. Right? So is it the construction plans that need to have those items in it? Not the the he's not gonna add it to the master plan. They're gonna add it to the construction plans, which the architectural review team will review. And maybe I'm wordsmithing too much.

I think

it I think it needs to be in the master plan so that the urban design studio so that that Richard Forbes team know specifically knows what they're reviewing it for. So it's it's in the master plan, and then, I mean, maybe you say

So that's a condition of the master plan. Maybe that should be a condition of the master plan that it implemented through the permitting process.

Yeah. So if there's if there's a better way to get that language in there, then I'm if there's a better condition that maybe you guys would write, I I

I mean, I think it's I think it's what you said, but it it must be reflected in the master plan prior to going to urban design and an appearance review.

But we're approving the master plan. I don't think

With with conditions, though. So it's

gonna That's I'm saying. I think that should be a condition, and you used the word approval. Condition of the master plan. Yeah. Whatever is that. I'll let staff maybe an attorney,

though, to tell us what she thinks because

She did she did ask. She'd raise her hand, please, Ms. Connectrator.

Yeah. I

was gonna suggest the master plan is recommended for approval subject to the following design enhancements contained in section fifty eight one one zero four of the code, subsections, bump, bump, bump, bump, to be implemented through the design and construction plan approval process. So that way we have the conditions that you want understanding that we aren't figuring all that out here, but that's a condition of approval to be implemented through the remainder of the process. And staff

I'm think I think that was

I think that's way better than I could have come up with, and I hope you wrote it down and can and maybe you should maybe you should make the motion. Just

to make a friendly amendment to the motion.

Okay. I'll make a friendly amendment to the motion that the, master plan and the density bonus associated with it is approved, subject to compliance with section 58.1104. Design enhancements, specifically subsections

A, b, e, f, g, and h.

I think we can leave it as if I understand that's gonna be That's

I think he needs to accept the amendment as I do. I accept it, and I accept as the seconder.

Alright. We have a motion as put in place by board member Drury modified by board member Kendrick Schrader, seconded by board member Baldocki. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. That completes the regular agenda for the day. Thank you all. Let's see here.

We have no announcements for today on any appeals or anything, but what we do have is kind of a a special session here. So board member Kendrick Schrader has interns here in presence today, and it was a suggestion to allow them to introduce themselves as a measure of, well, practice in a public forum. I'll hand it over to board member syndicator.

The future budding land use lawyers. So we have three going into second year law students. And I had asked if, with the pleasure of the board, that they take about fifteen or twenty seconds just to get up and briefly introduce themselves. So if you guys can come on up.

Good morning, chairman Seacrest and members of the board. Thank you all so much for allowing us to be here and introduce ourselves today. My name is Caitlin Hanson. I recently graduated from Duke University, and I'm currently a rising second year at Harvard Law School. A fun fact about me is that I was on my college dance team and was captain, and I'm born and raised here in Orlando, Florida. Thank you so much. Good morning, chairman Seacrest and members of the board. Again, thank you for letting us do this. My name is Caroline Schlitt. I recently graduated from the University of Florida, and I'm currently a student at Georgetown Law. And a quick fun fact about me is that I have a twin.

Good morning, chairman and members of the board. Thank you again for allowing us to sit and introduce ourselves. My name is Adam Young, and I graduated from Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee where I competed on the varsity swim team all four years. And I currently attend the UF Levin College of Law, and I hope to continue my legal career in Florida after graduation. Thank you.

Thank you, everybody. I will say, Caitlin went to Boone High School and did the law magnate. And Caroline went to Winter Park. And Adam went to Seminole. So we're very proud of our local representation here and thank you for indulging us and letting them have that experience.

Alright. Fantastic. Good to meet you and great idea to do that and use this platform. And with that,

we've Can just tell a quick Can I talk to thank you guys for being here? I I think it's a great environment for young people. I there was a gentleman, young he was a UCF student, I believe, and he sat through a couple of our meetings and he contacted me outside of here and sent me his resume. And while we didn't have an opening, I I had sent it to our HR person who gave him some ideas on his resume. I gave him some ideas of where to go, and he ended up getting a job for the, I think, city of Deltona as a as a planner. So, I mean, this is a good environment. You know? I think it's great when you go out and try to make things happen. That's my advice to young people. Give it a shot.

Thank you.

I concur on that, and I and I believe I know who the the young gentleman is you're speaking of. I had a similar experience, so he's got some tenacity. Alright. With that, thank you all. We'll adjourn for today at 10:09AM.