WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=cOIzkCOjcLY

Part: 1

1
00:02:47.200 --> 00:03:10.879
Good afternoon. Welcome to the June 9th, 2026 City of Apaka Planning and Zoning Commission. If everyone would please stand with me for a moment of silent prayer and the pledge. >> Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

2
00:03:10.879 --> 00:03:33.280
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. During tonight's meeting, each agenda item will have a time set aside for the

3
00:03:33.280 --> 00:03:55.280
public to speak and ask questions related to that particular item. If there's anyone here that has a planning or zoning related question that they would like to ask prior, please now would be the time to be recognized. >> You can Is this related to an agenda

4
00:03:55.280 --> 00:04:14.080
item? >> Yes. >> Okay. Wait till that time and you'll be able to do that during that that discussion. >> All right. Very well. Um, Commissioner Ryan. >> Yeah. I I have some questions for the staff. Mr. How >> I'm not going to throw you down the bus,

5
00:04:14.080 --> 00:04:28.880
but I have some questions for you. >> Okay. >> So, we It's been 60 days since our last meeting >> and we only have four items here, right? think we are we compliant as you know state law we're mandated by state law commission is is there items that were

6
00:04:28.880 --> 00:04:45.919
not not being presented to us >> yes so there are two items that were uh originally scheduled for tonight they had to renotice those items the mailers for that there was an ADU that was scheduled for tonight that is not on the agenda and then there's a reasonzoning off of Keen Road those will be presented

7
00:04:45.919 --> 00:05:00.000
at the July meeting >> but we're compliant with state The project was spoke to by >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. I just want to clear that up. Thank you. >> Thanks, sir. >> All right. We have item number one, the

8
00:05:00.000 --> 00:05:21.039
meeting minutes from April 14, 2026. Do we have any changes or additions? If not, then I'll hear a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. Motion by Commissioner Ryan. Thank you, sir.

9
00:05:21.039 --> 00:05:37.680
>> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Harrison. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Motion carries. >> All right. I'd like to recognize tonight we have our mayor and our commissioners

10
00:05:37.680 --> 00:05:54.160
Vasquez and Ruth in attendance. >> Velasquez. >> Velasquez. >> Vice Mayor. >> Just want to recognize you guys. Thank you for coming. All right. First item, legislative ordinance number 3158, smallcale future

11
00:05:54.160 --> 00:06:12.720
land use amendment, 4410 Chandler Road and 4420 Chandler Road. Owners Richard Chandler, applicant Chameleia Nerra. Parcel or location is 4410 Chandler Road and 4420 Chandler Road. Mr. Son Oh,

12
00:06:12.720 --> 00:06:28.160
>> Mr. Wow. >> Bow how pinch heading for Jun who's out on vacation. So, uh, this is a property. This is a small scale future land use amendment for 4410 and 4420 Chandler Road. The properties approximately 5.12 acres in size. It's shown on the

13
00:06:28.160 --> 00:06:45.280
vicinity map and the aerial maps. It's behind uh several residential areas and the adjacent Dwelli uh K38 school is within the vicinity of the property. The applicant has submit submitted a small-scale future land use amendment from residential very low suburban to office. The applicant is requesting the

14
00:06:45.280 --> 00:07:00.720
future land use amendment to permit the development of a new child care facility on the properties. A special exception for the childcare facility was approved in 2025 by the planning commission within the current future land use and zoning of residential very low suburban and RSF-1A

15
00:07:00.720 --> 00:07:17.440
as the land development code permits a childcare facility as a special exception within the RSF-1A zoning district. After approval of the special exception, the applicant submitted a site plan for a maximum student capacity of 275 students. During the site plan review process,

16
00:07:17.440 --> 00:07:34.720
staff indicated to the applicant that land development code section 423D2B7C states that the maximum number of children to attend the facility shall be limited in residential zoning districts by the number of persons per household as projected in the Apaka comprehensive

17
00:07:34.720 --> 00:07:51.759
plan and maximum number of dwelling units per acre in the future land use district of which the proposed site is located. Uh as I mentioned it's in a residential very low suburban future land use site has RSF-1A zoning per the 23 comprehensive plan table 21

18
00:07:51.759 --> 00:08:08.639
population projections the total population in 2030 is projected of 125,538 people per the 2030 comprehensive plan table 219 population projections estimated and projected households by size the total households in 2030 are

19
00:08:08.639 --> 00:08:25.680
projected at 44,19 93. Therefore, if you do the math, the number of persons per household is approximately 2.84. With the existing future land use designation of residential very low suburban, allowing a maximum density of two dwelling units per acre and the

20
00:08:25.680 --> 00:08:41.839
property is 5.12 acres. The maximum student capacity is 29 students. The applicant, as I mentioned earlier, is proposing a capacity of 275 students. Upon notification of this requirement to the applicant, it was noted that changing the future land use and zoning

21
00:08:41.839 --> 00:08:58.640
of the subject properties from residential to office would remove the maximum student capacity as that is not applicable in the office zoning and future land use categories if those future land use and zoning amendments are approved. The K through8 school located is

22
00:08:58.640 --> 00:09:16.080
approximately 335 ft to the north. Uh we visited the site this afternoon. You can physically see the school north of the subject property and that has a zoning of office and a future land use designation of institutional public use. If the change of future land use and additionally requested reszoning are

23
00:09:16.080 --> 00:09:31.200
approved, the applicant is required to obtain approval for a new special exception permit from the planning commission within the office zoning district of the properties at a subsequent meeting. If the change of future land use and zoning to office is not approved, the

24
00:09:31.200 --> 00:09:50.160
maximum student restriction will remain on the property in accordance with LDC section 423D2B7C. On April 1st, 2026, the development review committee recommended approval and the recommended motion this evening is to change the future land use from residential very low suburban to office.

25
00:09:50.160 --> 00:10:06.399
Uh if you have any questions, myself and the applicant are here. >> Thank you, Mr. H. Does anyone have questions of staff? >> I do. Commissioner Ry. >> Okay. Is this going to come back in front of the U planning commission later on? >> Yes. >> Okay. Because I have concern as I as I

26
00:10:06.399 --> 00:10:22.720
emailed you is two properties to just to the west. I don't see um access to the property. It looks like it's going to make those two pieces of property landlock. And my law as I understand it, you you can't landlock somebody's property. And I talked and

27
00:10:22.720 --> 00:10:37.519
you said there was access. Can you show me on the map where there's access to those two properties? >> Yes. >> West of the project. >> It's an easement. It's called Chandler Road. It's not an actual road. It's an easement. We drove out there this afternoon and it goes all the way over

28
00:10:37.519 --> 00:10:53.760
to Kelly Park Road. It's a dirt road. It comes down and the access to this property is from Jason Dwelli over these two properties and it's like a gravel path that allows access to here. >> But the road is only 15 ft wide. >> Correct. Yes. That's not adequate for

29
00:10:53.760 --> 00:11:14.320
access. I would think you would need at least a two-lane road. >> I have a problem with that. >> Okay. And I will remind you that this is a legislative matter. Um so it's really a policy decision to change the future land use or not on this. >> My answer is just going to come back

30
00:11:14.320 --> 00:11:32.399
again. Yep. It would come back if this is approved for the um special exception for the school or the daycare on the property. >> Has has anybody talked to the owner of that property just to the west? >> U Mr. Sanders is here. I know the

31
00:11:32.399 --> 00:11:47.519
applicant's representative has just spoke with him before the meeting. I believe uh public works staff has been in contact with him as well. And Vladimir is here who could answer some of those questions. >> Good. Good. Let's carry on. >> Thank you. >> No.

32
00:11:47.519 --> 00:12:02.079
>> Anyone else has questions? >> Yeah. I just wanted to um get some kind of confirmation that the primary >> desire to um propose the office future land use is to meet that exceeded

33
00:12:02.079 --> 00:12:17.839
capacity to get 280 students versus 29. That's correct. >> There's no other factors that are driving that. >> That's correct. Yes, ma'am. And then secondarily, um, there was a lot of information about a demonstrated

34
00:12:17.839 --> 00:12:34.079
community need to have the daycare. Um, is it possible that we learn a little bit more? Are there numbers to support that? Is it just anecdotally knowing the growth that's happening? But wanted to just understand more about the specific community need for the daycare. >> That would be the applicant that could answer that question because that would

35
00:12:34.079 --> 00:12:50.000
be their business study that would do that. But from my knowledge and experience, you have so many houses around the area. you have a school just to the north of it. Schools typically do have after after school care services, but if you have kids that are not young enough or not old enough to go to

36
00:12:50.000 --> 00:13:06.000
school, that would probably service that. That would be my assumption. >> Would love to hear some of the data and the numbers to support that. But totally agree. Anecdotally, that makes sense. >> Commissioner Wood, >> um, why is it being designated office?

37
00:13:06.000 --> 00:13:22.880
because the school to the north has a zoning of office and so that's consistent with the surrounding area right here. These two properties are tracks of uh this subdivision here. They are not buildable properties. You can literally see the school from here.

38
00:13:22.880 --> 00:13:38.720
Well, my concern is they say they're building a daycare >> down the road if heaven forbid it's not a successful operation now any type of office can go in there, >> right?

39
00:13:38.720 --> 00:13:54.959
>> Is there another designation that would restrict what can go in there to a dayare center? Well, they would be the special exception that was granted by the planning commission back in 2025, but that caps the students. Uh there's no commercial zoning or future land use

40
00:13:54.959 --> 00:14:11.560
within the surrounding of this area of this property. So, this is the most consistent zoning that's uh would be permitted in the area from a compatibility >> concern of just letting an office zoning in a residential area. >> Right. I understand.

41
00:14:15.120 --> 00:14:35.680
That's >> Yes, ma'am. >> I somehow seem to recall a discussion when this came up the very first time that the planning commission, if I'm correct,

42
00:14:35.680 --> 00:14:52.480
wanted to stipulate that it had to be a daycare, right? and if it wasn't a daycare that it would not allow the transition to quote office as as Commissioner Wood is talking about.

43
00:14:52.480 --> 00:15:08.480
Is that correct? Is that even >> possible? So I have the >> approval letter from the special exception here and there were conditions of approval uh that were granted by the planning commission is that the existing residential building had to be

44
00:15:08.480 --> 00:15:24.399
demolished. that had to be a commercial grade building. All roads on the property are upgraded for good egress and access according to city codes. The building before it is built comes back to and was reviewed by the planning commission. Again, that would have been a major development plan. That was what the applicant had agreed to. Even if the

45
00:15:24.399 --> 00:15:46.800
building was under 25,000 square feet, they had to go forward with a major development plan and that Chamber Road would be brought up to city standards. Okay. Um, I didn't see the EV charging stations on the map. It's too map is too small. Are

46
00:15:46.800 --> 00:16:02.880
they listed on the map? >> Because we're not at the site plan process yet. We're only at a future land use process. Yes. >> I like Okay. Is there Okay. So, we can't talk about the turning lane because I'm afraid it's going to block Jason when they sit long enough. >> That would be all reviewed during the

47
00:16:02.880 --> 00:16:19.279
site plan review process. Stacking turn lanes. Turn lanes are required per the code. Right turn lanes going into sites. >> And I'll get a chance to ask those questions in the future. I hope >> if yes, if you have this if it's over 25,000 square feet, then it would come back to the planning commission for approval and it would you would get

48
00:16:19.279 --> 00:16:36.240
another crack at the apple. If this is granted, they would have to come back for a special exception. I >> understand. Thank you very much. >> Anyone else? >> Very well. Thank you, Mr. How is the applicant here? Did they have a presentation? Good evening. For the record, McGregor

49
00:16:36.240 --> 00:16:51.519
Love 215 North Yola Drive from Louns. Um, we concur with staff's recommendation for approval. I won't go through uh the items that Mr. How went through, but I do want to address um some of the the questions that were asked and I'll also um provide just a

50
00:16:51.519 --> 00:17:08.000
little bit more context for um like really refreshing your memory about how we got to where we are because uh you may remember this from 2025. uh it came by it came through as a as a special exception in a standard residential zoning district and I don't think anyone

51
00:17:08.000 --> 00:17:23.600
at the time realized what the impact of this policy would be because there was some discussion during that meeting about the number of students and the applicant was proceeding with the idea that that they wouldn't be limited to 29 certainly um now when it was discovered

52
00:17:23.600 --> 00:17:40.000
um we worked with planning staff to to come up with a path to allow us to develop uh the the the project as it was presented. Uh and this is that path. But but there again um in terms of how you want to order the the level of detail of

53
00:17:40.000 --> 00:17:55.200
your questions and I know that um several of you have have expressed an interest in kind of the finer details of this this the special exception process is exactly designed for that. Um and the special exception process does allow for the attachment of kind of more

54
00:17:55.200 --> 00:18:09.919
customized conditions. uh we have submitted our application for a special exception. My understanding is that it may be at on next month's agenda. Um so you know we are at as you know the the comp plan amendment and reszoning stage.

55
00:18:09.919 --> 00:18:26.960
Um there are there are items that that we've taken note of just in your discussion and other items that we've discovered along the way that we know we need to address at that next hearing. Um this is the hearing for the future land use map. Um and and I and so when when

56
00:18:26.960 --> 00:18:41.280
we come back to you in perhaps another month, uh we'll address issues related to uh the access for for the neighbors who are here this evening um and for you know the other compatibility concerns that have been raised and specifically

57
00:18:41.280 --> 00:18:57.600
um to Commissioner Harrison's question because the the applicant who was next to me when you were asking that question did say that she doesn't tonight have the data with her. Um, I would say that we will bring that data for you at the special exception hearing so that we can

58
00:18:57.600 --> 00:19:12.960
present you with a little bit better of an idea of what the justification is from a sort of business uh and community needs standpoint. Um, but but we took note of that and we'll bring that with us. But with that, if you have any questions for me, um, uh, the applicant

59
00:19:12.960 --> 00:19:29.679
is also here uh, and can answer uh questions you have about the operation as well. >> Very well. Does anyone have questions the applicant? I do. Commissioner M, >> you you hold you held a public meeting, correct?

60
00:19:29.679 --> 00:19:47.360
>> Yeah, I believe that was prior to my um my being involved in this. I wasn't involved in the original um special exception process. Um I only came um to assist the applicant after it was determined we needed to go back through and get a comp plan amendment and reszoning. But yes, I do have the

61
00:19:47.360 --> 00:20:04.080
community meeting notes that it says September 18th, 2025 was the date. >> Okay. And that was at the time considering that there was the the applicant was considering that there wouldn't be a limit on the amount of students. >> That's correct. >> In in that scenario in the public

62
00:20:04.080 --> 00:20:21.760
meeting to the the location, what was the outcome of that? Uh so the let's see uh there there was a pre the presentation was that it would be a 15,000 square foot daycare facility um designed to serve approximately 280

63
00:20:21.760 --> 00:20:37.840
children. So that was presented. Um the meeting was attended by let's see the number of individuals well I know that the Sanders who are here tonight were there um and several other folks from the community. It seems um the community feedback um was related to White Dalia

64
00:20:37.840 --> 00:20:55.600
Drive, Chandler Road, Kelly Park School uh parents um coordinating pickup times. Um and it does appear that there was note about you know fencing height recommendations, you know, ranging from four to six feet. So those are the notes from that um that community meeting. Um

65
00:20:55.600 --> 00:21:11.520
and uh I can provide if if you would like to speak with uh Camila who's the applicant and the operator of the daycare facility. Um you could certainly um get more detail from her. >> Now I I have another question from what you just said. You mentioned that at

66
00:21:11.520 --> 00:21:26.720
that meeting it was discussed that it was 15,000 square feet. I just heard Mr. How talk about something at 25,000 square feet. >> That's a that's a good question. So, at the meeting in 2025, your meeting in 2025, uh, some compatibility concerns

67
00:21:26.720 --> 00:21:43.280
were raised about the site plan and and and the it is a 15,000 foot proposed facility, but there was a condition attached at that time that it would be treated as a major development plan under the code, which the the the threshold is 25,000 ft. That ensured you

68
00:21:43.280 --> 00:21:58.880
that the applicant would have to come back with their site development plan to address those compatibility questions. And then it was during that process where the the student limitation issue was discussed. Um now I'll say that my

69
00:21:58.880 --> 00:22:15.600
intent is that you know we're in a position at the next meeting to present you with the the mostly fleshed out uh and engineered site plan to answer those questions such that you might not feel that a uh that you need to exert, you know, site plan level approval because

70
00:22:15.600 --> 00:22:31.640
we've essentially done the work to put that site plan together. and we'll present you with that information. But that's that that answers the question about why is this 15,000 square ft when 25,000 is the major development plan threshold?

71
00:22:33.120 --> 00:22:50.720
>> Mr. R. Okay. Have you come with agreement with uh Mr. Sanders on access to his land? >> So I I was just you know introduced to Mr. Sanders and and his wife a moment ago. Um, and I was aware sort of that

72
00:22:50.720 --> 00:23:08.000
there was an access a private access question going on uh between uh the applicant and and the Sanders. Um, what what my I'm resolved to do between now and when I come back to see you is to work with the Sanders and also with um the public works director. Uh because I

73
00:23:08.000 --> 00:23:24.240
think we need to coordinate with all three parties to figure out what needs to be done here. and my, you know, one of the main items I'd like to present to you is what the what the resolution of the access issue will be um as it relates to the Sanders, but I I can't tell you that that I have the answer to

74
00:23:24.240 --> 00:23:39.760
that tonight, but when we come back for special exception approval, um we we intend to present that. >> So, you haven't talked to Mr. Sanders about this access to the property? >> I know that the applicant has um but but I have not personally. Is >> the applicant here?

75
00:23:39.760 --> 00:24:02.159
>> Yes, the applicant's here. Okay, good. Hello, my name is Camila Na. Can >> you speak louder? Move the mic closer. >> Sure. Can you hear me now? >> Yeah. Yeah, I can hear you now. >> Hi. Uh, my name is Camila. I'm the applicant. Um, I know there's been back and forth questions regarding the access

76
00:24:02.159 --> 00:24:17.840
for the Sanders. I have met with him and Mark, which is the representative of the seller. We had a meeting in person. a few months ago. He share um what he wanted to have a 60 ft uh ingress

77
00:24:17.840 --> 00:24:33.120
through White Dalia and then the fence correct the fence and then um a few other items that we discussed at that meeting. Then after that we've been back and forth emails. There were changes in

78
00:24:33.120 --> 00:24:49.679
the request but then we haven't figured out we haven't reached an agreement yet. Um during the meeting I did agree to give him that access and um we're currently you know waiting to see if this is going to get reszoned in order

79
00:24:49.679 --> 00:25:05.360
to move forward with any other um discussions. >> Don't you think you need an agreement before we proceed on this development? And do you think is it possible we can come to an agreement with Mr. Sanders? I believe so because

80
00:25:05.360 --> 00:25:23.360
um the discussion has been amicably we've been back and forth. There's no I am open to give him that access. I don't like I said I don't want to lock him into his property. Um he currently have two access but the ex first special

81
00:25:23.360 --> 00:25:39.440
exception permit was required for Chandler Road to get um shut down. So that's when all this discussion came. But now that we're going through a different process, I don't know what are going to be the new requirements for the new special permit. So it's up to the

82
00:25:39.440 --> 00:25:56.640
city to tell us what they want from us. And then >> do you have a solution for him for so he can access his his properties? >> Well, the city I believe I think Mr. Dell Smith was the one and Vladimir has been in touch with Mr. Sanders and the

83
00:25:56.640 --> 00:26:12.799
recommendation was a 60 foot um ement where the already the city of Apabka gave him I believe four or five years ago they provide him an eastment in whitealia um so now what we will be just

84
00:26:12.799 --> 00:26:35.960
making that ement um wider for him >> thank you >> welcome any other questions >> taking a Look at your plan up there. How many parking spaces do you have in there? >> Oops.

85
00:26:39.600 --> 00:26:54.880
>> It doesn't blow up. Just >> it doesn't move. >> Oh, it doesn't move. But I know we provide more car spaces than what the city require. I can't I don't want to give you exact number and not >> about how many parking spaces are in there?

86
00:26:54.880 --> 00:27:18.880
We have Do you allow me to open my phone so I can give >> How many to here. >> 44. >> Yes. >> 44. >> 44. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you.

87
00:27:18.880 --> 00:27:35.200
>> You're welcome. >> One more question. Don't mind. Where do you plan to put the EV charging stations? That's required by state law. >> Sorry, I couldn't hear that. >> Where do you plan to place the EV charging stations? That's required by state law.

88
00:27:35.200 --> 00:27:51.679
>> EV. >> Yeah. Electric vehicle charging stations. I can ask my engineer. I don't have the answer to that question at the moment. >> One more question. >> Thank you. I wanted to just follow back

89
00:27:51.679 --> 00:28:07.679
up on the community need and um I know you don't have the data for us tonight, but what have you explored in terms of other daycare centers in the vicinity and just so that we have an understanding of the need to increase um your desire to increase the capacity.

90
00:28:07.679 --> 00:28:24.640
>> Sure. So we currently own the oldest baker in Apopka. It's called Apopka Child Academy. Our family has been in the business for over 25 years. Um over this decade because it's the oldest day in Apopka. We have seen the need for

91
00:28:24.640 --> 00:28:40.399
this service. I believe it's a basic need. Right now both parents are usually working. So they need that this type of service for their children. Um we are also accredited school. We have the highest accreditations. We are Apple

92
00:28:40.399 --> 00:28:57.520
accredited. We are um evaluated by the DCF and the number that we wanted for the facility is based on all those um uh criterians which are of the highest standards. >> Okay. Thank you for sharing that. And so um as of today you would anticipate

93
00:28:57.520 --> 00:29:15.840
being at the capacity of 280 should it be >> yesed based on the DCF um uh standards. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you everyone for your time. >> Mr. Chairman, I I have a procedural

94
00:29:15.840 --> 00:29:33.200
question and it's probably more Mr. House >> and and that question is we're we're looking at this ordinance here as a change in the future land use designation. So essentially what we're asking or what

95
00:29:33.200 --> 00:29:49.200
I'm asking is we're asking to vote on this But we don't know. And if in the future something does not go through and does not pass, we've now changed the future land use designation on these two properties. Is that

96
00:29:49.200 --> 00:30:04.880
correct? >> That's correct. So you're making a recommendation this evening either or for approval or denial of the request. This is a legislative item. It's a future land use amendment. So it's really a policy discretion or decision of the of the planning commission. If

97
00:30:04.880 --> 00:30:20.159
you don't think it fits in with the goals and policies of the city, you think it's a bad planning principle, you have the discretion to vote no on it. Um, if it is approved, if the future land use is approved and the zoning is approved tonight, it goes on to the city

98
00:30:20.159 --> 00:30:35.600
council. They hear it for two readings. They could either approve it or deny it. Um, if it is approved, then there is an office future land use and zoning on the property. Let's say the daycare center does fall through. It could be then a permitted any type of the permitted uses

99
00:30:35.600 --> 00:30:55.120
in the office zoning category. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Please give us your name and your address for the reference. >> Yes, sir. My name is Bobby Sanders and Jessica.

100
00:30:55.120 --> 00:31:13.760
live at 4404 Jason Dwelli and um um our property we bought from my aunt and um we have me and my cousin bought five acres together two and a half in the back and we were going to have an

101
00:31:13.760 --> 00:31:30.240
agreement to put our access to Jason D willy between it in the meantime our property which both of us had gated gated and with a lock while we were gone to work and all that worked

102
00:31:30.240 --> 00:31:44.480
out very perfect. His house got broke into. When his house got broke into, this has been I've been retired over 13 years ago. This is almost 14 years ago. We haven't spoke since then. It busted

103
00:31:44.480 --> 00:32:00.320
our family up with them regretfully. And I opened it back up the gate and Then I went down to Orange County and deliberately put my property, my five

104
00:32:00.320 --> 00:32:19.200
acres 0.25 and his five acres 0.25 in his name and forget about that because we made an agreement that our right away would be to Jason Dwelling, which it has been for 27 years. But see,

105
00:32:19.200 --> 00:32:33.279
there was a a path through there before when we moved there that my aunt and uncle used and they used as well that went to Kelly Park into down to Pawn Can. And in the meantime, when this

106
00:32:33.279 --> 00:32:49.679
first started, they were going to put a place to run their water up by by by our by by our driveway. That would have been our driveway. and they would put down the um storm

107
00:32:49.679 --> 00:33:10.159
runoff up front. But then she didn't um Chameleia didn't want to do that because that would go through their parking lot there, which which was fine with me. But then they announced that the that Kelly Park School that Richard

108
00:33:10.159 --> 00:33:26.240
Chandler graciously has donated our our driveway to Orange County. And you know, and then it come up the issue that our warranty and quick deed had not been completed.

109
00:33:26.240 --> 00:33:41.120
And my cousin, who is like an angel, she's a realtor, came to us. And his son Nick, who we've known ever since they were born, they have a chance to buy 20

110
00:33:41.120 --> 00:33:57.679
acres. And this was going to mess them up if we didn't sign this. And they did it through prayer. And that night, Jessica had tears in her eyes. She said, "Bobby, let's just sign everything over." So we >> Excuse me, sir.

111
00:33:57.679 --> 00:34:14.159
>> Turn it off. >> So we again prayed about it and I called up Andrea, her lawyer for Chameleia, and told her, "Come, we're going to sign the

112
00:34:14.159 --> 00:34:30.159
papers." and she came to our house and she said,"I will assure you that your land will not be be denied a proper access that your property can be sold just like this property one day. It won't be put into a jeopardy spot. It'll

113
00:34:30.159 --> 00:34:45.760
be put into a safe spot. Our our rightway will be put. We're in a corner." They gave us two rideaways. One at Jason Lwelli and one that me and Rick Chandler shared that went down to to to White Dia. We had two of them. Well,

114
00:34:45.760 --> 00:35:01.920
it's right on the corner. White delay makes a very sharp curve. You can't see a car coming from this way. It's it it's it's most dangerous thing from Kelly Park School. There's at least every morning 50 cars dropping kids off,

115
00:35:01.920 --> 00:35:18.560
pulling in my driveway, backing up right on that corner where they can't even There's kids walking on the sidewalk, backing up, going and we we we we told the police department, "Somebody's going to get hit." Well, they came out there two days, two different days, and

116
00:35:18.560 --> 00:35:35.680
gave warnings to people. They stood up there. They sit up there, and the people wouldn't wouldn't even drop their kids off. they'd go around like they wasn't going to drop their kids off and go through the proper way at Kelly Park School. But all I'm all we're asking is for a fair 60-foot easement that would

117
00:35:35.680 --> 00:35:52.320
never ever jeopardize our property. The power run down from Kelly Park a mile long to through a pole. If they're going to provide them with power, we want to be that we're the only ones left on that power all the way down that dirt road.

118
00:35:52.320 --> 00:36:09.040
Chandler Road for the last 20 years since the nursery has been defunct. A a helicopter couldn't get down that road. And that's where the problem come in. She was school secretary at Kelly at at Zelwood Elementary. And I opened that

119
00:36:09.040 --> 00:36:26.079
gate up. She wasn't going down that road. You couldn't get down that road without getting stuck. And it what I said that it it caused very much resentment with with with me and my cousin. And before that there was never no problem. And um we we were asking for

120
00:36:26.079 --> 00:36:41.680
better commu communication with Kameha. I' I've wrote her probably five or six times. I tried to straighten it out when the when the warranty deed come out and with no answer whatsoever. So we did all that without any question answers from

121
00:36:41.680 --> 00:36:57.280
her. her lawyer who was name was Andrea and there's she has two lawyers on this and um we're just asking for um to be treated fairly through this whole ordeal and that's all we're asking.

122
00:36:57.280 --> 00:37:14.240
>> What is your idea of a fair solution? Well, if if it was if it was ideal of what we was was was afforded, it would be the Jason Dwelli with a 60oot Eastman at at at at at at Chandler Road and that would be our driveway.

123
00:37:14.240 --> 00:37:29.839
>> Can you talk to an attorney about that? Is that is that what you're entitled to? >> I was advised to get attorney. I was advised by a a a realtor attorney not to sign anything on the warranty deed or the quick deed to this settled, but I went ahead and did it. I'm doing it

124
00:37:29.839 --> 00:37:47.119
through faith that we will be not denied a complete safe access for any time that when our future with our grandchildren or whatever that they develop out there at our property that we will be give the same considerate because this property

125
00:37:47.119 --> 00:38:03.119
was with me and Ricky bought together and this was my aunt and uncle's house. >> I I understand that we're we're talking what is your concern here? I mean, you gave us a lot of history on it, and I appreciate that, but what what is your concern? Is it being landlocked or easement to your property

126
00:38:03.119 --> 00:38:19.119
>> with with with a fair accessment with a 60-foot easement that they can always that they can they can do anything with our property that that they're they're able to do with their property? That's all we're asking. >> Have you made a proposal to the uh applicant,

127
00:38:19.119 --> 00:38:34.079
>> sir? >> Have you made a proposal to the applicant or the applicant's attorney? Well, I and and and had very nice help from from city of Ampa. U Mr. Vladimer who's very sincere that tried to to help

128
00:38:34.079 --> 00:38:49.680
us out with that. And he told us he told us he said, "I'm going to tell you right now, you're you're not going to be landlocked. It ain't going to happen." and Dale, his assistant, who's um has But then we've been going up there and

129
00:38:49.680 --> 00:39:07.520
for the last month since the mayor race, they have not had any meetings whatsoever. And we did we talked with um our new mayor, Nick Netor, and he was um very um supportive of of of listening to the listening to us, and that's all we

130
00:39:07.520 --> 00:39:40.720
asked for. And thank you for the time for that. We got to tell you what we fail. >> Mr. Sanders referred to Could you clarify that for us? >> Good afternoon everyone. Simonoski. I'm

131
00:39:40.720 --> 00:39:58.240
the public works director and the city engineer for the city of Apka. So we had over I don't know probably six nine months several meetings with Mr. Sanders. Uh we also talked to the applicant. We were trying to find the best solution for both parties. So

132
00:39:58.240 --> 00:40:14.880
especially for Mr. Sanders to continue having the full access to the property. It seems like right now um I don't know how well you can see what is actually shown on that screen. Uh there is a 15 ft ingress egress easement right now

133
00:40:14.880 --> 00:40:31.760
along this line in this corridor where Mr. Sanders's current driveway is just off on the south side of White Dalia Road. And that is an old what is called the Chandler road because it was a private road that goes all the way across the

134
00:40:31.760 --> 00:40:46.480
subdivision around all the way to Kelly Park to the north. >> Excuse me. It's more like a driveway than a road. >> It correct. It It's labeled as a road, but it's actually only a 15 foot ingress egress right. So technically cannot be an official road because it doesn't meet

135
00:40:46.480 --> 00:41:06.160
the the rightway with standards. So it's technically a driveway. Yes. So when the subdivision developed here and built white dalia drive, they provided a 30foot also in igress

136
00:41:06.160 --> 00:41:22.400
ement at this corner here. I'm sorry. I'm going to try to point out when I'm making the circle here. There's an existing driveway right now. there that is uh the driveway is less than 30 ft wide but the ingress eress easement is

137
00:41:22.400 --> 00:41:37.680
30 ft wide and I believe that's what Mr. Sanders is referring to to have access to both properties. >> Yeah, I went out there today and looked at it's not wide enough. It's just a driveway. It's not a road not it's not wide enough to be called a road and he needs to have a road access to his

138
00:41:37.680 --> 00:42:00.000
property, not just a driveway in my opinion. Commissioner Ryan, you're referring to the 30foot of White Dalia or to Chang Road. >> Yeah. White Del drive. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. It's just a driveway. It's not a road.

139
00:42:00.000 --> 00:42:16.319
>> Correct. Built like >> correct. Yes. Yeah. We we absolutely agree to that. Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So that's what currently exists there. These are the current situation, right? How much frontage is he entitled to for access on road access for that property? Do you know?

140
00:42:16.319 --> 00:42:35.040
He's asking for 60 ft. What is he entitled to? Well, this is a hypothetical question now. So, let's say if the there are currently two properties there, right? >> Right. >> So, there existing two access points at

141
00:42:35.040 --> 00:42:51.359
this point. There's a driveway that Mr. Sanders built which is going through the 15t egress igress from Jason Burley Parkway and there's a 30 foot driveway ingress igress from white dalia so there are two access points right >> so based on the two properties basically

142
00:42:51.359 --> 00:43:08.480
the properties are not landlocked they have a legal access point at this moment >> I think >> without any development happening >> I think it's entitled to to a brogue not not >> so let's say these two properties uh subdivide into more than three parcels,

143
00:43:08.480 --> 00:43:25.359
three parcels or more. They will sub basically they will require a subdivision permit at that point it will require a full access with probably minimum 50 foot of rightway with a proper >> roadway to that. So again at this moment

144
00:43:25.359 --> 00:43:39.920
this is the situation that we currently have and this is more of a zoning issue I would say but these are the requirements that let's say hypothetically this is what can happen with the property this is the potential of the property so that's what can

145
00:43:39.920 --> 00:43:57.440
happen in the future that yes that 30 foot driveway here in ingress igress that was provided by the subdivision by Chandler Oaks Right. >> The current one that Mr. Sanders is primarily utilizing that he has built,

146
00:43:57.440 --> 00:44:18.520
that's the historic ingress that was recorded prior to the subdivision being built. >> Mr. H, do you know how much um frontage they are entitled to for road for property access?

147
00:44:20.880 --> 00:44:37.680
you're talking about the current situation or if it's subdivided in the future as uh the city engineer was alluding to >> current because currently there is access. Now whether or not that access is expanded or not depends upon how

148
00:44:37.680 --> 00:44:52.000
that's handled between the applicant and the property owners. >> We can't develop that property with that access. Correct. Uh, as far as what you could do there and what improvements can be added to it, I I cannot answer that question at this time. No,

149
00:44:52.000 --> 00:45:10.240
>> Mr. H. >> So, basically the easement, it sounds like the question is is can the applicant get the 60 foot easement? Is that basically the question that you have? >> My question was what what how much frontage is a property owner entitled to

150
00:45:10.240 --> 00:45:26.560
>> have access to road? It's based on the zoning district. I believe Mr. um it's the lot width in the zoning district and I think the adjacent property has RSF1 zoning district. However, if you look at these properties and go back to the historical aerials, you can tell that

151
00:45:26.560 --> 00:45:48.160
there four parcels there. They were holdouts for when that subdivision was done. So, this easement was the primary access, >> but typical the question is I believe it'd be 75 ft based on that zoning district. Thank you, Mr. House. >> Thank you, sir.

152
00:45:48.160 --> 00:46:08.560
>> Thank you. >> If I could if I could be be afforded a brief moment just to respond to some of the discussion. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you. Um, so regarding the access and and I'll tell you that the next time that I I intend to be before you, I will speak to this with hopefully more of an

153
00:46:08.560 --> 00:46:24.880
update about what's being proposed and and what the path forward is. But, uh, and I will be able to speak more to the the legal issues at play here because these are legal questions. Um, and really the the question that you're asking, Commissioner Ryan, is is what are they entitled to? And I think that

154
00:46:24.880 --> 00:46:42.000
um you know as a general matter and and certainly uh Andreanne can correct me if I misstate this because I don't want to be wrong. Uh the applicant when any when any parcel is being developed and there is access the um you know the developer is not under an affirmative obligation

155
00:46:42.000 --> 00:46:58.640
to improve their access that exists today. Uh but they are under an obligation not to impair the the existing access that they have. So the the solutions that are being being proposed though um are are going to be above what is required uh as a legal

156
00:46:58.640 --> 00:47:14.079
matter and and I think you know the applicant is happy to do that because these folks are their ne their neighbors. Uh but ultimately this is going to be a private mostly a private discussion about okay what what access do we need to provide for our neighbors to the west.

157
00:47:14.079 --> 00:47:31.520
>> But he's in the road not a driveway. you you're referring to like the width or the improvement or both. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yeah. And it may be that may be one of the solutions that we bring to you next. Uh is is that at the special exception hearing we talk about what what we've agreed upon. I hope that we

158
00:47:31.520 --> 00:47:47.200
can agree upon a solution to this. Um and and I will say that just to make uh you to give you some assurance about the decision that you're making today is that nothing that a recommendation for approval and approval of the comp plan and zoning will not foreclose any

159
00:47:47.200 --> 00:48:03.839
option. Uh because the special exception is going to be where the the configuration the layout of this use will be sort of determined in a binding concept plan. And I so I encourage you to kind of ask those questions at that time. Okay.

160
00:48:03.839 --> 00:48:19.839
Thank you. >> Anyone else? Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> All right. We'll bring it back to a board for motion and discussion. >> I have a concern. >> Okay. Commissioner Wood, >> the reason why I asked about the number

161
00:48:19.839 --> 00:48:35.119
of parking spaces and I'm looking at the design of the building. That would be a great office building down the road. and we're looking at zoning it so that that can be an office building down the road.

162
00:48:35.119 --> 00:48:49.839
Um, this is a residential neighborhood. Um, the only non residential is a school and there I have no issues with the daycare center. I think it's needed in that

163
00:48:49.839 --> 00:49:12.480
area. My concern is zoning it as an office. Um, there has to be something else can be done there. >> I would tend to I I would tend to agree with Commissioner Wood. Um, Mr. How mentioned one thing and, you

164
00:49:12.480 --> 00:49:29.760
know, ultimately I can see, you know, a a use for the daycare, but I cannot see a use for an office. And I realize that it is the required uh you know u land use zone to be able

165
00:49:29.760 --> 00:49:49.839
to get 283 students there. But I do not um I have a I have a um a real negative thing that it if it as we've mentioned here before that it at some point is not a daycare. >> Anyone else?

166
00:49:49.839 --> 00:50:07.119
>> Bobby um come Mr. how clarification that the special exemption that was given when that was given this was an item of discussion. >> Yes. >> And at that point it was that the special exemption only applied to using

167
00:50:07.119 --> 00:50:23.040
it for that specific use. >> That's correct. Yes. >> So should it close down, go out of business, it cannot be turned into an office unless another special exemption was offered up. Is that correct? >> Right. So the way that this would work in this case is is that the if let's

168
00:50:23.040 --> 00:50:37.920
assume the resoning and the future land use to office were approved. They would have the applicant would have to come back to get the special exception for the school. If that did not get approved the special exception or they decided to walk away from the project then you would have office future land use and

169
00:50:37.920 --> 00:50:54.319
zone property there. >> Okay. My my question is 10 years down the road >> this all goes through let's hypothetically say that it goes through the city council. It's approved, the building is built, it goes into operation 10 years from now, it closes for whatever reason.

170
00:50:54.319 --> 00:51:11.440
Would the special exemption allow that to be turned into something different, an office as commissioner Wood had asked, or does special exemption only apply to that specific use that we apply? >> Special exception prior to the use on property. >> Yes. >> So, it could not be turned into an

171
00:51:11.440 --> 00:51:26.720
office without another special exemption being issued here. >> Right. No. So if an office building would be a permitted use in that zoning district. So let's say the school was approved with a special exception, the use then ceased on the property.

172
00:51:26.720 --> 00:51:43.520
Somebody went and converted it to an office. That would be a permitted use. So they would not have to come back for a special exception. >> Okay. So what Mwood said is valid. >> Correct. Yes. >> Agreed. Okay. Thank you. >> I go ahead >> again for the record. McGregor Levage spoke with uh the city attorney Andrew

173
00:51:43.520 --> 00:51:59.040
Han about this because the applicant uh the applicant has no desire of course to develop anything other than a a daycare but I also recognize your concern. You know you don't want to uh provide broad entitlements for some future user in in the future. Uh what I would recommend is

174
00:51:59.040 --> 00:52:15.839
that the uh comp plan amendment ordinance in it has language that would limit the use to uh to this type of use daycare type of use. And I think that Andrew, did I misstate that that that that's possible? But we're I think that

175
00:52:15.839 --> 00:52:31.040
would be a solution to the the problem that's being discussed. >> I don't believe there's a restriction on doing that in a popco when it comes to the future land use map amendment. Uh, of course that's problematic as putting a condition on the zoning which requires, you know, turns it into contract zoning, conditional type of

176
00:52:31.040 --> 00:52:47.280
zoning, but uh that could be something that could be placed in the future land use amendment at least as part of your recommendation to allow staff the time to vet it so that when it goes to city council, city council can be or commission city commission could be fully informed and in making their decision whether or not

177
00:52:47.280 --> 00:53:04.480
they want to do that. >> Okay. So, we can put that as an additional condition of our recommendation. Right. >> Essentially as part of the future land use map uh that is on the table right now. Yes. >> Okay.

178
00:53:04.480 --> 00:53:22.640
>> Thank you. Okay. Back to the board for discussion or a motion. >> Uh one procedural question. Does this need to be um decision today? And the reason I ask is because I do think the data surrounding where we can see that the 280 capacity is in front of us to

179
00:53:22.640 --> 00:53:38.880
know that that's a need versus the 29 whereas we could leave it um you know as is zone but just wanting to see what that variance is. So is it going to be exactly at 280 or is it more you know like 30 or somewhere around 100. So question number one, does this need to

180
00:53:38.880 --> 00:53:55.200
be decisioned today or do we have an opportunity to wait for some material data to understand the significance of that capacity differential? >> So to answer your question, Commissioner Harrison, we certainly would like a decision today. Um, and I think the reason why uh that that you can make a

181
00:53:55.200 --> 00:54:11.680
decision today is is that we will have to come back for the special exception approval and the this use cannot move forward without that. Um, so we know we have to get a special exception approved and and we can go into more detail about that data. >> And just for clarification, you all did the data, but you just don't have it

182
00:54:11.680 --> 00:54:31.119
with you today or is it >> correct? Okay. Thank you. >> Yes. >> Anyone else? All right. Open for a motion. >> So, we're only voting on change of zoning. Nothing else. >> Correct. >> Future land use.

183
00:54:31.119 --> 00:54:53.359
>> Correct. Change of zoning. the next >> yeah I'm on the wrong page one >> okay yeah this is >> for the future land use the same property will address the >> Mr. Chair Mr. suggested motion up on the

184
00:54:53.359 --> 00:55:10.240
screen. >> Go ahead. I I don't know how I would propose this, but um I I'm I'm making a motion that we not approve this

185
00:55:10.240 --> 00:55:26.720
as it is currently presented because I feel that while the comprehensive plan has the possibility of being able to be worded in such a way to allow the daycare but not allow an

186
00:55:26.720 --> 00:55:42.000
office at some point in the future of this specific property. We're kind of working backwards and it's I I'm in favor of a daycare. I'm not in

187
00:55:42.000 --> 00:55:59.599
favor of it being approved for an office. >> Well, if that's your desire, then you can make a recommended motion. You read the motion to deny. I'm I'm I'm going to make a recommendation that we deny this um

188
00:55:59.599 --> 00:56:18.400
ordinance 3158 as it currently is proposed. >> Very well. Is that sufficient or need to read the motion as written? >> Well, it's sufficient. >> Very well. >> Commission, I would just ask that you do in in that I asked it be included in the

189
00:56:18.400 --> 00:56:34.559
motion the reason for the denial that was just stated. Um, but just to reference that in your motion as well. >> Okay. I would >> for those reasons for >> reference the reasons that I presented as the as the reason to deny. >> Very well. Is that acceptable, Mr. H?

190
00:56:34.559 --> 00:56:49.200
>> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Very well. All right. Thank you, sir. Motion by Commissioner Mott to deny. Do I have a second? >> I second it. >> Okay. Second by Commissioner Woods. All in favor say I. Any opposed?

191
00:56:49.200 --> 00:57:13.119
>> Motion denied. All right. Item number two. This is quas judicial. So I would ask if any members of the board had exparte communication on this matter. >> No.

192
00:57:13.119 --> 00:57:31.400
>> Very well. Ordinance number 3159, change of zoning, 4410 Chandler Road and 4420 Chandler Road. Owners Richard Chandler, applicant Chameleia Mera. Uh, Mr. How?

193
00:57:32.480 --> 00:57:48.400
>> Good evening. Bobby How for the record, planning manager. This is the companion reszoning to the future land use amendment that was just denied by the planning commission. recommended for approval of denial or recommended for denial uh to the city commission. Um I won't go through the presentation. We

194
00:57:48.400 --> 00:58:04.480
already kind of did that, but like I said, this would be the reasoning from RSF-1A to office. Um we kind of went through the area and stuff like that and the development review committee did recommend approval. The recommended motion is approval. Um however, being

195
00:58:04.480 --> 00:58:20.480
that it was recommended for denial, obviously that would be denial. So >> very well. All right. >> Mr. H. >> Commissioner Ryan. >> Yeah. Um, is there any way you can take the word office out of there and just make it exclusively for childc care center

196
00:58:20.480 --> 00:58:36.559
>> within the zoning? >> Yeah. >> The title of the zoning district is office. The issue is is that you have a recommendation of denial for the future land use and you have the zoning >> probably come back to us sometime in the future, >> right? >> Probably come back. It would be I mean

197
00:58:36.559 --> 00:58:52.160
one of the options could be a development agreement that would limit the uses on the property to um child care or something like that. I think there was something done like that previously before on a residential case years ago where there was a DA that limited buffering and stuff like that

198
00:58:52.160 --> 00:59:08.480
when they did a future land use. M >> Mr. Chairman, Mr. how I would I would encourage the staff >> and all parties to um review a way possible that a daycare

199
00:59:08.480 --> 00:59:23.520
could be at this location >> but that there not be a future designation of office of some fashion >> so I would encourage that whether that's through the comprehensive plan etc

200
00:59:23.520 --> 00:59:41.200
that's up to you to decide because um and I know there's been a lot of work. This was back into 2025, but I would encourage that we get that so that there's not some hangup. And in that whole process, please please figure out

201
00:59:41.200 --> 00:59:58.960
the egress, ingress and and access to the property behind it. Yes. >> So that that's not a sticking point. >> Right. I think I think our our um unanimous vote was pretty clear what we were most concerned about.

202
00:59:58.960 --> 01:00:14.400
>> Right. Thank you. >> Very well. Anyone have questions of staff? Very well. I have questions of the applicant. >> Sir, would you like to make a statement? >> Sure. Again, for the record, McGregor Love and just very briefly to kind of

203
01:00:14.400 --> 01:00:29.920
guide our efforts moving forward and as we go to to city commission, I I understand what the primary concern is. Um the comp plan amendment proposal that that you heard on the on the fly here was aimed at that. And just to to I guess ask you, Commissioner Mock,

204
01:00:29.920 --> 01:00:47.280
because you made the motion, um, was it your view that that was not sufficient to address your concern or that you were simply presented with an ordinance that didn't already account for that and you weren't comfortable voting on voting on one that you hadn't vetted yet? >> That's correct. >> Understood. >> Too broad. I I I believe there's a way

205
01:00:47.280 --> 01:01:02.880
to get it into and get it approved and go through all the correct steps >> through the comprehensive plan so that this is not I just feel that we're working on um well we don't intend to have that. We

206
01:01:02.880 --> 01:01:19.119
don't you know the reality is you know we're looking back 20 30 years and that was a a dirt path. >> I think we're on the same page. I think we're on the same page. We understand I'm clearly not against the date clear. >> Okay. >> I'm nobody. >> No.

207
01:01:19.119 --> 01:01:34.720
>> I appreciate that. Um then I have nothing further. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. >> Is there anyone here from the public that wishes to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back. >> We got one. >> Oh, do we? Oh, okay. Sir, your name and

208
01:01:34.720 --> 01:01:51.680
address for the record, please. >> My name is Donald Toler. Good evening, commissioners, and I live at 4306 Tigers Drive in the adjacent uh subdivision. And my question simply is in regards to access to the child care for vehicles

209
01:01:51.680 --> 01:02:08.400
traveling northbound on Jason Dwelli, how will they enter the child care? And conversely, vehicles exiting the child care, how will they access Jason Dwelli northbound if they wish to? >> I just want on the record. Thank you.

210
01:02:08.400 --> 01:02:28.559
address that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Again, we are um we will be prepared to address these sort of detailed questions at the special exception stage. But um and and I'll when it comes to the northbound because that's a left turn

211
01:02:28.559 --> 01:02:43.839
that the gentleman's referring to uh onto the property. Um I don't see the detail on here that indicates whether there's offsite improvements. So I don't want to make any statement. And I will come back to the uh with the special exception to you know inform you of that

212
01:02:43.839 --> 01:03:01.040
uh after we speak with our engineer. Um the the egress is a um is a right turn only at the south of the project um that onto um Jason Dwelli headed southbound. Um those are the questions I can answer

213
01:03:01.040 --> 01:03:33.520
based on the site plan before us but we will include that u additional detail in our special exception presentation. Is there anyone else in the public speak? I'll make the motion to deny the proposed change of zoning for the

214
01:03:33.520 --> 01:03:50.079
mixeduse gateway to light industrial. Is this this is not the >> Sorry, that's a typo on there. Yeah, it's to office. So, yes. >> Yeah, my apologies. >> Yeah, I'm sorry. >> Yeah. >> Um

215
01:03:50.079 --> 01:04:05.440
from the residential single family estate to office >> and commission. What I would recommend in any motion is uh for denial is that you include the reason for denial. In this case, uh well, I don't want to put words in your mouth. Presumably, the reason for denial would be simply that

216
01:04:05.440 --> 01:04:21.039
it's not compatible with the land use as uh um as given the recommendation of the >> Yeah, the reason for denial is it's not compatible with the character surrounding areas based on the findings and facts presented. >> Very well. Thank you, sir. A motion by

217
01:04:21.039 --> 01:04:47.880
Commissioner M. Do I have a second? >> A second. >> Commissioner R. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any oppose? Motion to. >> Thank you. On the site plans.

218
01:04:48.400 --> 01:05:05.359
Item number one of site plans is quasi judicial ridge phase three major development plan. want the commission at export communication on this matter. >> Very well. Owners Apopka Centerline Development LLC.

219
01:05:05.359 --> 01:05:22.160
Applicant VHB Cara James R. Hoffman PE location southeast corner of Vignyan Road and Boy Scout Road. The Ridge phase 3 major development plan. Miss Sanchez. >> Yes, sir. Good evening. Jean Sanchez with the community development

220
01:05:22.160 --> 01:05:37.520
department. This item is a quasi judicial request before the planning commission to recommend approval of the major development plan for the ridge phase three. Um before I begin, I would like to make one correction to the staff

221
01:05:37.520 --> 01:05:55.760
report for the record. The action item information section incorrectly identifies the proposed use as food market etc. that was included in error and the correct proposed use for this item is multif family residential development and um it consists of 363

222
01:05:55.760 --> 01:06:12.720
multif family dwelling units within parcel 3 of the ridge. The subject property is located within the ridge plan development generally near boycott road and a popka road. This phase is located within parcel three of the approved PD. The proposed

223
01:06:12.720 --> 01:06:28.880
development area is on the western area of Barcel 3 with the remaining portion reserved for future commercial or office development under it would be under a separate development plan application. The property has a mixeduse future land

224
01:06:28.880 --> 01:06:43.359
use designation and PD zoning designation. The Ridge PD was established by ordinance number 2858 on July 21, 2021. The PD was later amended by ordinance

225
01:06:43.359 --> 01:07:01.200
number 2938 on July 27th, 2022, which modified the approved PD and expanded the overall development area. The overall ridge PD was established as a mixeduse development consisting of residential, commercial, office, industrial, and recreation uses. Parcel

226
01:07:01.200 --> 01:07:16.960
3 is located within the approved PD and encompasses approximately 30 acres. Um about 14 acres are allocated for this proposed development and the remainder of part parcel three is identified for future commercial use for parcel A is

227
01:07:16.960 --> 01:07:33.599
identified as the lake recreation area and central open space amenity area for the entire PD. Um so it's intended to serve the entire development. The proposed multif family portion of parcel 3 includes, as I said, 363

228
01:07:33.599 --> 01:07:49.760
dwelling units within 11 apartment buildings, a clubhouse, pool, parking areas, internal drive, sidewalks, landscaping utilities, and related site improvements. Staff also confirmed with the applicant that EV charging stations

229
01:07:49.760 --> 01:08:05.920
will be incorporated into the project as part of the construction site plan review process. Access to the development will be provided through Boy Scout Road as well as through the extension of Bronson Lake Drive to Okoia Apopkco Road. The plan also identifies

230
01:08:05.920 --> 01:08:22.799
internal access drive serving the apartment buildings and parking areas with proposed turn lane improvements to be further reviewed during the construction site plan review process. The MDP preserves future coordination with the remainder of part parcel 3 by

231
01:08:22.799 --> 01:08:39.679
showing cross access and pedestrian connections to the future commercial office development. The plan also identifies pedestrian connection toward parcel 8, the community park area. Landscape plan includes perimeter, parking, foundation, and internal

232
01:08:39.679 --> 01:08:57.120
landscaping with canopy trees, understory trees, ponds, hedges, and ground covers that specifically include live oaks, uh, southern magnolia, red maple, crepe myrtles, and jasmine. The DRC recommends approval of the ridge

233
01:08:57.120 --> 01:09:12.960
phase three major development plan based on consistency with the comprehensive plan land development code approved PD master plan and the findings and facts presented in the staff report. The recommended motion is to recommend approval of the MDP to the city

234
01:09:12.960 --> 01:09:28.400
commission. Staff and applicant are available for questions. >> Thank you ma'am. Does anyone have questions of staff? Commissioner Wood. Um I'm look you go back to the map

235
01:09:28.400 --> 01:09:44.319
there >> on Boy Scout Road. I can see there's a left turn lane. I don't see unless my eyesight's failing me at my old age. Um there's no right turn lane. Is that just farther back that I can't see it?

236
01:09:44.319 --> 01:10:00.159
>> Um I the right turn lane is predicated um is it 35 miles an hour? It's It's 35 miles per hour or greater that's required. And right now, um I can't recall I'm going to have to defer

237
01:10:00.159 --> 01:10:16.400
that to our city engineer. I can't rec call the posted speed limit along Boy Scout Road right now. I know we did a speed study. >> Okay. Well, even though it's below it may be below the threshold, there's a heck of a lot of traffic on Boy Scout

238
01:10:16.400 --> 01:10:32.560
Road. >> I agree. and people turning in to that development or apartment complex could be backed up onto Boy Scout Road. So why can't even though it's not required, why can't you

239
01:10:32.560 --> 01:10:49.040
require them to have a right turn lane? We can only require them what is required per code or what's um shown on some sort of study as a required improvement based on what they break on

240
01:10:49.040 --> 01:11:06.400
that road. Um again, I'll defer that to the city engineer when it comes time for him to come up here. Um because it was in fact reviewed by um public works. >> Well, I know that the DRC had a discussion about the uh other access.

241
01:11:06.400 --> 01:11:24.000
>> Yes. um about a right turn lane going in there >> and we know that is below the threshold. >> Okay. And I have a concern that we um having these developments whatever

242
01:11:24.000 --> 01:11:41.440
built without sufficient access for the people trying to go continue down if they're backing up on the road to turn in and especially down the other one because it's across the street from the proposed mountain bike park. Um

243
01:11:41.440 --> 01:11:57.280
there will be a lot of heavy traffic going through there hopefully if we have the mountain bike park. So I just think we should have on these plans right turn lanes regardless of the speed limit. >> Well that would be something to be

244
01:11:57.280 --> 01:12:13.280
brought up regardless of speed to be brought up as a text amendment to our land development code by the city commission. Right now all staff can do is require what is per code and we're bound by it. So if something doesn't trip that threshold, we we cannot

245
01:12:13.280 --> 01:12:27.679
legally require them to have those improvements without e either paying them for it or doing it ourselves as a city. >> Okay. >> So certainly we'll keep that in mind. >> Yeah. Can Vladimir um verify the speed

246
01:12:27.679 --> 01:12:52.640
limit on Boy Scout? I'm pretty sure it's 35 at a minimum. I was trying to open the spreadsheet that we have all the but for some reason kept crashing. >> So at 35 it >> it is at a minimum it's 35 miles an hour

247
01:12:52.640 --> 01:13:13.480
>> require right turn lane >> that will require a right turn lane. Correct. >> So would that can that be amended before we approve it? Is that included? >> Unless I missed it. What are you talking about over here?

248
01:13:24.080 --> 01:13:41.239
>> One one here. >> Okay. >> I'm glad I'm not the only one that has bad eyesight here. Yes, I I'm I think that will be required. I'm pretty certain about that. >> Okay. So, can it be amended and brought back to us for approval?

249
01:13:41.360 --> 01:14:03.679
>> It can be. Great. >> Ultimately, the item can be tabled and it can't come back before you. Yes. >> Okay. >> Anyone else? >> Mr. Okay, I I I know right turn lanes were put in at the apartment complexes

250
01:14:03.679 --> 01:14:22.400
on uh Bing. Um so there's right turn lanes. So I don't know who paid for that or how that happened, but they're right turn lanes both north and southbound to both those apartment complexes. So it's it's possible. >> Commissioner Harris,

251
01:14:22.400 --> 01:14:38.880
>> um I noticed that this is proposed to happen in in one phase. Can you all speak a little bit to the timeline and any potential traffic um just the mitigation of what that would uh the community would endure throughout the construction buildout

252
01:14:38.880 --> 01:14:57.440
development phase knowing that it's all happening all at the same time? >> Are you asking staff to go through the phases? No, I'm just anticipating what have you all anticipated around having this project done in one phase whereas it's not going to be potentially spaced

253
01:14:57.440 --> 01:15:15.280
out as to mitigate some whatever that could be around traffic around different um impacts the public uh works area road closures. So do you have any kind of foresight of what that would potentially impact the community members that are already having to traverse that roadway and area? We have if you're if you're

254
01:15:15.280 --> 01:15:32.239
asking what the plans are, if there are future plans for improvements on Boy Scout in particular and Oko Papkco Road, I can tell you right now we have a couple of studies at least. We did a uh corridor study. We had the ridge actually do a corridor study when the

255
01:15:32.239 --> 01:15:48.320
ridge came in um for Okoya Pabkco Road and that study um particularly pointed out that that intersection on Boy Scout and AOA Popco uh will require a traffic light. Um, we

256
01:15:48.320 --> 01:16:03.199
also have water studies that off the top of my head I emailed. We have um I don't know I you may have heard about the build grant that we did. So that um build grant award when we did

257
01:16:03.199 --> 01:16:20.640
the application. It also recognizes in the build grant all the required improvements along Koapa road that we anticipated. Now, it doesn't include something like a PDN where it's very um technical and tells you everything because we still have to do that as part

258
01:16:20.640 --> 01:16:37.120
of the design um of road improvements along Koapka road, but that's also anticipated. Um do we have anything on Boy Scout? >> Yeah, the Boy Scout on the with the improvements of Rooa Papka from Harmon Road where the hospital is further to

259
01:16:37.120 --> 01:16:54.239
the north all the way to Hotton will require signalization. that was already in the VHP study that was prepared for the build grant. So, >> we're also anticipating um a couple more

260
01:16:54.239 --> 01:17:11.600
roundabouts. I'm sure you've seen the roundabout along um like Eden Crest area um which was required with the subdivision development plan. So, um that's one. There is um you've heard us talk about the half ramp on Bignyan Road

261
01:17:11.600 --> 01:17:27.440
that's going to come with the construction of of the of another roundabout. >> Correct. >> And we have another roundabout. It's going to be a lot of roundabouts. >> Yes. >> We have another roundabout on is it Harman? >> Harmon and Binian. Yes.

262
01:17:27.440 --> 01:17:43.120
>> Yes. >> But we just put the four-way stops. Yes. >> Uh back to Boy Scout finally spreadsheet finally open. Uh we have a document that is a 45 currently 45 miles an hour. This is the I think why it's still 45. It's

263
01:17:43.120 --> 01:17:58.080
the remnant from the old road. >> Yeah. >> Where only Mr. Bronson's orange groves were there. Now with all the development it seems like that's going to lower to probably 35. >> 35.

264
01:17:58.080 --> 01:18:13.679
>> Yes. Yes. 35 or greater it requires peran development code requires a rectum right >> so during DRC I'll just tell you I don't know if Dale if you can remember this during DRC public works representative

265
01:18:13.679 --> 01:18:30.960
the senior engineer on there um wanted to look through because a major development plan is not entirely all engineered plans so for us to require um fully engineered plans as they go through the the applicant goes through a

266
01:18:30.960 --> 01:18:47.280
construction site plan review process and um the public works representative stated that they needed to because we have a lot of studies going on or that we've established or published they're going through all the studies to

267
01:18:47.280 --> 01:19:06.640
finalize and identify all the turn lanes that's required all the turn lane improvements um that was deferred at construction site plan. >> I would still like to see the plans that we approve to at least have it penciled

268
01:19:06.640 --> 01:19:22.960
in that there will be right turn lanes at both entrances because I know at the DRC there was a big discussion on that. >> It was >> and it was deferred and my opinion is it should not have been

269
01:19:22.960 --> 01:19:43.040
deferred. Anyone else? >> No, sir. >> Yeah, >> thank you. Is applicant here? They have a presentation. >> Sir, I'm sorry. Did you Did he call the

270
01:19:43.040 --> 01:20:04.560
applicant? >> Good evening. Uh, I'm George Georgia. I'm the engineer of record. uh 225 East Robinson Road, East East East Robinson Street. Um >> can you raise your mic a little? >> Thank you. >> Um so in fact that uh particular issue

271
01:20:04.560 --> 01:20:20.000
came up during DRC and we had discussions with with public works and the uh the resolution on that was uh we added a note on the plans. it would not be shown on on this particular sheet. But on sheet C2.1, we

272
01:20:20.000 --> 01:20:37.360
did add a note uh because at the time the speed study was not uh I guess recovered and it was not certain what the speed limit was. So we did have a note on the plane saying subject to determination of the posted speed limit on Boy Scout Road, a right turn lane may

273
01:20:37.360 --> 01:20:53.920
be required uh prior to construction of the site uh plan approval. So that note is stated on there that if it is determined that the uh speed limit on Boy Scout road is uh 35 mile or or above it would be included in the construction

274
01:20:53.920 --> 01:21:16.719
site lanes. Thank you. Just understand the buildout is expected uh to happen in one full phase and so can you just share a little bit at a very high level what that timeline looks like and the reason I'm inquiring is because of everything that we heard prior around

275
01:21:16.719 --> 01:21:31.760
all the improvements signage roundabouts all the construction that would potentially impact current residents. So the timeline and then just a little bit more about like what that looks like potentially from a impacting um those that traverse the roadways in the area.

276
01:21:31.760 --> 01:21:47.760
>> So the timeline is for the um so that that particular project includes the construction of the road extension on the south extension of Lake Bronson Drive that punches out to uh Okoya Pavka Road and the apartment uh site as well.

277
01:21:47.760 --> 01:22:05.040
So they're both part of that uh parcel three improvement. Uh as far as timeline, uh they're both going in together at the same time. Uh if anything is going to precede the other, it will be the road construction is going to precede the apartment uh uh

278
01:22:05.040 --> 01:22:20.560
construction. As far as impact to to the surroundings, um you know, we'll we'll have determinations of construction entrance and and route for construction. uh not expecting to have any uh any you

279
01:22:20.560 --> 01:22:37.280
know uh negative impacts on on on the uh traffic in that and u and the surrounding areas. And and just one other question in terms of um expected occupancy. Um what has as as you all have been working on this

280
01:22:37.280 --> 01:22:54.480
project in terms of all the other apartments that have been coming up along um Binian and even the I would say single family um developments along Bronson and Boy Scout um Boy Scouts, excuse me. What has been your um I guess take on the occupancy and the need for

281
01:22:54.480 --> 01:23:12.719
another um development of this size? >> Uh so our understanding is that there has not been many multif family uh developments in in in surrounding areas. uh uh this has all been kind of uh you know u u determined going through the

282
01:23:12.719 --> 01:23:29.520
the the establishment of the PD uh the uses and and each of those uh the the ridge PD um and and the entitlement for for the uh various uses. Um so um what we're proposing here is uh consistent

283
01:23:29.520 --> 01:23:46.639
with what the the PD intended and the PD you know there was a a traffic impact analysis that was provided with it uh which you know um uh anticipated the uses and and um the the um the the

284
01:23:46.639 --> 01:24:03.840
traffic and the uh um yeah that that will generate. So >> percent officed anticipated based on the studies and everything that you have done in the proposal of the project. >> Right. >> Thank you.

285
01:24:03.840 --> 01:24:19.360
>> Anyone else? >> So just just just to be clear, this would be the sixth apartment complex in what a mile and a half radius. So, I would not say that

286
01:24:19.360 --> 01:24:38.320
there's not um uh apartment complexes in the in the area. There's six. There's four on Bingan and there's already one on Boy Scout that's actively um in in the process of renting. So, this would be number six. So, just just be aware.

287
01:24:38.320 --> 01:24:54.560
And I I don't have the numbers. I could certainly get the numbers of of the four that are on Bignyan and the one that's on Boy Scout on the west end. Um, how many occupant How many units are on this one? >> Uh, 363.

288
01:24:54.560 --> 01:25:11.920
>> 350. >> Uh, 63. 363. >> 33. >> 363. >> Yeah. >> So, there's you're talking um I would I would guess to say that of these six, the occupancy is going to be well over

289
01:25:11.920 --> 01:25:27.199
Um, I'd say probably 3,000 in in in a mile and a half. And if you use the traffic numbers that Apaka uses at 1 point 57 or something like that per

290
01:25:27.199 --> 01:25:44.719
dwelling unit, um, you can only count really quick what the traffic will happen in this boy scout bin. Yes, good evening. Uh my name is Kevin Walsh and I'm here representing the uh

291
01:25:44.719 --> 01:25:59.840
applicant also here. Um we are very familiar with all the different apartment projects that have gone in over the last few years. We still own we developed the one that was part of this overall development which is over on

292
01:25:59.840 --> 01:26:15.920
Bignyan and Boy Scout in that area. Um the occup occupancy for ours right now is at about 90%. So, we're familiar with that. We're still in some lease up. Um, the other ones from what we can gather is in that

293
01:26:15.920 --> 01:26:32.480
same similar range though, ranging from 85 to 95%. Um, so yes, there's there is a number of apartments out there. We still believe that there is still the continual need for future apartments. These won't come

294
01:26:32.480 --> 01:26:48.320
online for, you know, another 18 months or so. and um you know all those other ones will will be um another year and a half older than than they are today. So um we are good there. And I think again

295
01:26:48.320 --> 01:27:05.920
kind of back to the right turn lanes um you know we would we would respectfully ask that we um do receive approval tonight and not continue it for 30 days just to add a schematic right

296
01:27:05.920 --> 01:27:20.480
turn lane in there. We do have the note that addresses them specifically. We have the condition from the DRC meeting. Um so um I think the right turn lanes have been addressed, discussed and will

297
01:27:20.480 --> 01:27:40.239
be u finaliz shown on if required will be finalized on the uh land development plans as uh as part of the engineering approval process. on the excuse me on the copies of the plans we're looking at are the notes there

298
01:27:40.239 --> 01:27:56.239
>> excuse me >> the notes about the right turn lanes I'm looking at some plans I don't see the notes am I missing them >> sheet >> you can't switch the sheets Bobby >> no

299
01:27:56.239 --> 01:28:11.679
>> uh if you have a copy there it's sheet C2.1 >> no the question we're asking to approve what's in front of us. Okay. And you said there's notes. Shall we write turn lanes on what's in front

300
01:28:11.679 --> 01:28:28.800
of us? Is there Where's the notes? >> It's on another sheet. And unfortunately, >> that's what I >> The staff report you're looking at with this item includes the entire major development plan set which includes that note. >> Okay.

301
01:28:28.800 --> 01:28:51.719
>> One of the sheets includes >> What page is What page is that? >> Sure. according to what I did specify that sound as far as what the >> correct that is specifically

302
01:28:53.280 --> 01:29:12.080
required prior to construction but I understood it based on the speed study requirement. Yes, ma'am. >> Um, which is the exact uh condition that our public works representative who's uh

303
01:29:12.080 --> 01:29:27.120
also our engineer asked the applicant to do. >> Okay. >> So, it was in it was in the >> it says may >> right may require priority >> as Mr. hand would probably uh may in

304
01:29:27.120 --> 01:29:44.800
anything also may not >> if it's required it would have to be implemented. >> Okay. >> And we do have the note if you'd just like to see it real quick. Unfortunately, it's not shown on the video, but it is part of the plan.

305
01:29:44.800 --> 01:30:02.520
>> I just don't like getting incomplete documents. If the documents that we are given to look at does not reflect what you have there, how can I make an intelligent decision?

306
01:30:10.159 --> 01:30:26.000
report materials, not the PowerPoint. The PowerPoint is really just a snapshot. We can't put the entire MTP pages here. Um, which it wouldn't really appreciate that if I tried to do it. So,

307
01:30:26.000 --> 01:30:44.719
actually your decision is based on the staff report and in the agenda that was published for planning commission. >> Okay. And I'll add U Commissioner Woods is that the staff report says that there's competent substantial evidence that it's

308
01:30:44.719 --> 01:31:06.639
consistent with the requirements of the PD, the comprehensive plan, and the Latin code as well. >> All right. Now, we almost have questions. >> Very well. Does anyone from the public here wish to speak on this matter?

309
01:31:06.639 --> 01:31:26.480
Please give us your name and address for the record. >> Good evening. My name is Aaron Hollerbach and my address is 2530 Apaka Reserve Lane number 411 Apakka, Florida 32703.

310
01:31:26.480 --> 01:31:43.199
Um, I'm here tonight because I live, I guess, in what is the rich. And as someone who moved here in August of last year from Virginia, um, I understand that a lot of people in Apopka would say that I don't really have a leg to stand

311
01:31:43.199 --> 01:32:00.320
on to be here speaking about such a matter. But even in the year since I've seen Apakka for the first time, I spent a lot of time in wild Florida when I was growing up, but mostly in the southwest portion of Florida. So, I had never been to Apopka until July of last year. And

312
01:32:00.320 --> 01:32:15.840
when I came out here to look at the place um or to look at the city, um you know, even then on Boy Scout Road wasn't as developed. There are two housing developments, Bronson and Bronson. I don't know the other words of them. And

313
01:32:15.840 --> 01:32:32.159
then the view at the Ridge, um there's a parcel at the corner of Bignyan and um Boy Scout that is now warehouses. And I think maybe a gas station will be there. Um, but you know, there are a lot of people who live here now since these

314
01:32:32.159 --> 01:32:47.280
plans were originally brought up 5 years ago and 5 years in Apopka seems like it might as well be like 25 years ago because it has changed so much it seems like. Um, and my concern is that what I'm hearing today about the traffic and

315
01:32:47.280 --> 01:33:03.760
some other things is just not accurate to my daily life experience like living there for the last almost year. It is very unsafe turning onto Akoia Popka Road from Boy Scout Road. There are frequently accidents there. The traffic is always backed up. It takes a very

316
01:33:03.760 --> 01:33:19.679
long time to get off of Boy Scout Road either way. But the AOAKa side is the worst. Um, and my concern is that what I really fell in love with Apakka, um, and what I've continued to enjoy, even though I've seen so many

317
01:33:19.679 --> 01:33:35.760
construction developments start up in the last year since we've been here, it's it's wild to me to see this kind of development at this pace. I've never seen this before in my entire life. And what I love about Apakka is the access to nature. There's a lot of green space.

318
01:33:35.760 --> 01:33:50.560
And I'm not talking about like landscaped green space with some considerations for native plants. I'm talking about like wild life and like ecosystems that don't exist anywhere else in the country. It's beautiful here. And I think there's something

319
01:33:50.560 --> 01:34:07.360
really special here about kind of the small town feel, but it is bigger. But then there's all these new developments being put up everywhere. And it's starting to look like all of the cookie cutter suburbs in certain areas that I wanted to get away from. I didn't want that. And I don't think a lot of people

320
01:34:07.360 --> 01:34:24.560
in Apakka want that. Just cookie cutter development next to each other. I think Apakka has a lot of character and that that's worth maintaining. And I just don't want to see this level of development. And none of the apartment complexes have ever been full on Binyan,

321
01:34:24.560 --> 01:34:40.480
on Boy Scout, on AOAKA. None of them have been full ever and they're still building homes for people to buy and you know people haven't moved into all of those yet. I can only imagine if this apartment complex gets built on top of

322
01:34:40.480 --> 01:34:57.360
what's already there. I cannot imagine how anyone can get around at all. And I'm just worried about the wildlife, too. There is wildlife on this property. I drive by it every day. And I don't want to see more animals with nowhere to

323
01:34:57.360 --> 01:35:13.679
go and for people who live here to not be able to get around and enjoy living here and want to stay living here. Thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am. And you're not alone in your concerns and um your statement

324
01:35:13.679 --> 01:35:27.760
that you haven't lived here long enough. If you're a resident of Apaka and you pay taxes, you have every right to speak here whenever you want. >> All right. Anyone else here wish to speak on this matter? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the

325
01:35:27.760 --> 01:36:04.000
board for discussion and a motion. Okay, I'll make a motion to u recommend make to approve bridge phase three major development plan. All right, motion by commissioner Ryan.

326
01:36:04.000 --> 01:36:22.320
Thank you, sir. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Mott. All in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? Okay, motion carries. All right.

327
01:36:22.320 --> 01:36:38.000
Site plan number two, major development plan, Florida Town Center Hotel. As this is quasi judicial, has anyone on this board had exparte communication on this matter? >> No sir. >> No. >> Very well.

328
01:36:38.000 --> 01:36:54.000
Owners Florence Hotel Company LLC, Apopka Acquisition Company. Applicant Jason W. Surl. Location Lot 5, Florida Town Center PD Plan Development. Mr. How? >> Thank you. Good evening. For the record,

329
01:36:54.000 --> 01:37:10.239
Bobby Howell, planning manager. The applicant has submitted a major development plan for consideration for a four-story 137 room Marriott Fail Marriott Fairfield in Townplace Suites Hotel located on lot 5 of the Fidian Town Center PD plan development which is

330
01:37:10.239 --> 01:37:24.880
located at the northwest corner of the intersection state road 429 and the 429 connector road in US 441. You see the vicinity and aerial maps are on the screen. Future land use of the property is commercial zoning is PD as I previously mentioned. The property is

331
01:37:24.880 --> 01:37:40.000
approximately 2.91 acres in size and has a future land use of commercial. The hotel is a permitted use within the PUD. This is the master plan that was approved back in 2021, amended by the city commission back in 2024 which shifted some lot uses around. This is

332
01:37:40.000 --> 01:37:56.880
parcel 5 as you seen on the screen there and I have the mouse there that shows it as well. The hotel site will be accessed by a Flidian Town Center Boulevard and Southport Road consistent with the approved PD. Design and construction to Southport Drive by the Fidian Town

333
01:37:56.880 --> 01:38:12.960
Center property owner, which is the east west road within the Fidian Town Center PD will be will commence no later than the end of the third quarter of 2026. The applicant has committed to obtaining the permit for the road construction prior to the permits for the construction of the hotel. consistent

334
01:38:12.960 --> 01:38:27.760
with the approved PD and land development code requirements. A total of 142 parking spaces are provided on site. Seven of those are accessible. Two are EV spaces and 133 are regular parking spaces. And nine bicycle parking spaces are provided as well, consistent

335
01:38:27.760 --> 01:38:45.280
with the land of the LCO. A 45 by 12t unloading zone is proposed adjacent to the northern building entrances. You can see on the screen up here where the red dot is. The landscape plan includes shade and understory trees consisting of willow oak, Florida elm, Chinese

336
01:38:45.280 --> 01:39:02.159
pistache, red holly, bald cypress, crepe myrtle, and shrubs and count ground covers consisting of aia, rosemary, distillium, and jasmine. Grass is proposed with Bermuda grass on the site. Major development plan proposes a total of 25% open space on this site. includes

337
01:39:02.159 --> 01:39:19.280
site landscaping as well as the open space that's within the PUD that was already accounted for when that was approved. Consistent with the PUD master plan storm water retention is provided on track H of the Fidian Town Center PD. This is the architectural elevation of

338
01:39:19.280 --> 01:39:35.199
the proposed hotel. Approval of the major development plan does not constitute or authorize construction. They would still have to go through the construction site plan process as well. On April 29th, the development review committee recommended approval. The recommended motion this evening is

339
01:39:35.199 --> 01:39:51.679
approval. I'm available for questions and the applicant is here as well and they may have a presentation. >> Thank you, Mr. House. Anyone have questions of staff? >> Commissioner, >> real quick, did um the road is it

340
01:39:51.679 --> 01:40:08.800
Southport Road? Is that going to come over from Plymouth Sarrento? Is that when you said the road was going to be >> Yes. >> So there's two connectors that will be done. Okay. >> Yes. >> All right. Thank anyone else. Do you have a question?

341
01:40:08.800 --> 01:40:26.080
>> No. Okay. Thank you, Mr. How is the applicant here? >> Yes, sir. Good evening, chair, members of the board. Jason Surl, Mayor, Nex, and 200 East New England Avenue, uh, Winter Park here this evening together with the property owner. Uh we very much appreciate Mr. House's presentation, all

342
01:40:26.080 --> 01:40:42.000
of his and his team's efforts to date. Uh and having come through the DRC, uh we concur with one clarification request, please. Uh the staff report that was just presented to you. It's under access and parking. It's on page two, and it was touched on uh in Mr.

343
01:40:42.000 --> 01:40:57.280
How's presentation. The last sentence reads, "The applicant has committed um to obtaining the permits for the road construction prior to the permits for the construction of the hotel." Um I believe

344
01:40:57.280 --> 01:41:14.080
respectfully that is factually incorrect. It would be the obligation of the master developer who owns the bigger parcel which was shown on that master plan. We my client is the owner of just one of those lots within the bigger development. the bigger development

345
01:41:14.080 --> 01:41:30.560
developer is the one who is required to pull the permits for the road. And what we had offered up uh to staff as part of the leadup to tonight's discussion would be the commitment from us that we would bear the burden that would be the lot five developer of this hotel site only would bear the burden of making the

346
01:41:30.560 --> 01:41:47.520
master developer, the big property pull their permit for said road construction. And if we were not successful, then we would not be able to pull ours for the hotel. We share your concern. We obviously don't want to build a hotel that doesn't have a road to it. That makes no sense and is

347
01:41:47.520 --> 01:42:04.000
backwards in chronology. It's a matter of timing and I just want to make sure if we can please uh with feedback from staff that that clarification could be made as part of any approval tonight. Appreciate your support. Happy to answer any questions. >> Very well. Thank you for that

348
01:42:04.000 --> 01:42:21.199
explanation. Then a question of the applicant. >> A follow question on that point. Um, thank you. Has the master developer not acknowledged that they would be building the road as yet? >> That's a great question. And in fact, while I was sitting there

349
01:42:21.199 --> 01:42:38.960
watching the prior matters, I pulled the development agreement. So, as a PD, the master developer entered into and it's required under city code to do development agreement. There was some discussion about that relative to one of the other items, the first item, the daycare item. So when you do a DA,

350
01:42:38.960 --> 01:42:56.320
master developer has to obligate themselves to do certain things in return for the return concessions on the zoning. It's a very natural thing, not just an AOPKA thing. We do these all over uh central Florida and all kinds of jurisdictions and in the county. And yes, in the DA, which is recorded in

351
01:42:56.320 --> 01:43:13.840
2021, the same time the PD zoning was approved, uh the street commitment, both internal and external, was made and is outline is detailed on pages three and four. I'd be happy to read it if you'd like me to spare you the the reading, but it just says the the the key point

352
01:43:13.840 --> 01:43:30.960
when it talks about although the project, this is the big project master plan development may be constructed in phases with a phasing plan, each individual phase of the project shall be required to provide sufficient on-site infrastructure, i.e. road connection to

353
01:43:30.960 --> 01:43:46.400
satisfy the applicable city code requirements. So yes, it's an obligation of the master developer and its DA with the city. It's also an obligation uh as it relates to our clients agreements with them on a private party basis. So yes, in more than one place, not a

354
01:43:46.400 --> 01:44:03.440
surprise >> and anticipated by them. >> Anyone else have questions? >> So have you had conversations with the master developer? >> Yes, sir. Good question. >> What's the outcome of that? They are in constant communication with uh the

355
01:44:03.440 --> 01:44:19.119
master developer and if I may uh Rich Demarco with the ownership group would be happy to to talk a little bit more about that interplay. >> Good evening Rich DeMarco Dorado Development 301 East Pond Street, Orlando, Florida. Um yes, we are in constant discussions with the master

356
01:44:19.119 --> 01:44:34.080
developer. I think this is just a matter of timing. They have lots of parcels they're trying to sell or develop themselves and I think they're trying not to overimprove the infrastructure before they have the final pieces. And there may be some other things, other component developments that are in front of you guys or will be in front of you

357
01:44:34.080 --> 01:44:50.239
soon. So I think what they're aiming to do is time that roadway improvement with overall developments. And it's not just the road. The storm water which sits behind our parcel and next to a future multif family parcel um is a critical piece for us as well. We cannot o open or build a hotel without storm water or

358
01:44:50.239 --> 01:45:09.199
a road. So um we're all in in in in agreement that it has to be done. >> Well, and I'm sure you guys are covered. I just wouldn't want something negatively to happen to you. >> No, for sure. Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Very welcome. Any more questions?

359
01:45:09.199 --> 01:45:24.320
>> No, sir. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? >> I would guess not. >> Bring it back to the board for discussion and a motion.

360
01:45:24.320 --> 01:45:43.280
>> Okay. Go ahead, >> Commissioner Norman. the correction. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> All right. >> Open for a motion. >> I I'll make a motion uh that we recommend the approval of the Fidian

361
01:45:43.280 --> 01:45:58.639
Town Center Hotel Major Development Plan as it is consistent with the comprehensive plan and land development code based upon the facts and findings presented by in the staff reports and exhibits with the correction. Thank you, sir. Do I have a second?

362
01:45:58.639 --> 01:46:16.719
Commissioner Harrison. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. All right. >> All right.

363
01:46:16.719 --> 01:46:32.880
Do we have any old business? >> No, sir. >> Okay. New business. All right. I have an item of new business. If y'all will bear with me for just a minute, there've been a lot of contention apparently about the planning

364
01:46:32.880 --> 01:46:49.679
commission and uh I had people notify me that there was social media foolishness and newspaper stuff going on about it and and I really want to address that because what has happened is through our

365
01:46:49.679 --> 01:47:05.600
esteemed commissioner Ruth and other people on had to put in a motion to remove the planning commission. And what I saw was the Apakka chief on

366
01:47:05.600 --> 01:47:22.159
the 14th had a headline. It said, "Apopka city commission to explore how to remove planning commission members and and I realized that there was a meeting after that and the meeting after that there was uh some backing off of that. I think after finding out that the

367
01:47:22.159 --> 01:47:37.199
state of Florida didn't allow a just in mass removal of a planning commission and and certain uh certain things that caught my attention was that we were uh let's see let me read I I want to be

368
01:47:37.199 --> 01:47:53.840
accurate here is that uh we need a broader community and planning commission and appointments for fresh perspectives and better planning expertise. granted current planning structure isn't adequately addressed the pace of development infrastructure demands and

369
01:47:53.840 --> 01:48:11.040
then obviously the motion to remove the planning commission board. Well, a couple problems I have with that. Number one is the planning structure and the pace of development and infrastructure demands is based on the code that we follow. We do not come up here and make

370
01:48:11.040 --> 01:48:28.000
a decision based on what we like or what we think is good or bad. We have four different things that we follow. We follow the land development code, future land use element, and city comprehensive premium. We don't have the authority to deny or approve anything. We're a

371
01:48:28.000 --> 01:48:44.480
recommendation board. We recommend to the city council. The city council has approved every single development that's happened in the past and currently. The city council is also in charge of the budget that adds the infrastructure

372
01:48:44.480 --> 01:48:59.920
and make sure the infrastructure stays up with the development. We do not have that authority. We have no authority other than a variance or a special exception. We have absolutely no authority to approve a plan. Everything we've done tonight is simply a

373
01:48:59.920 --> 01:49:15.840
recommendation. And I quote, conversation centered. This was during the the workshop where there was some backpedaling. The conversation centered on the city to revisit how development decision are reviewed amid concerns over traffic, water capacity,

374
01:49:15.840 --> 01:49:34.159
infrastructure and demands to Apakka's rapid growth reviewed. Every one of us up here has concerns about the infrastructure, but we are not the end final say in that. But when that is put in the newspaper and that's put

375
01:49:34.159 --> 01:49:50.320
out to so the net result is it looks like it's being deflected and the planning commission is responsible for the city of Apakka's rapid growth and the infrastructure and the traffic and all that and I quite frankly take offense at it and I apologize to my fellow commissioners. They have to put

376
01:49:50.320 --> 01:50:07.199
up with that. That's completely out of line. We're volunteers. We come up here to do the job. We don't benefit in any way and we make the best decisions we can but we don't have the authority to approve anything other than a variance. We have the authority to make a

377
01:50:07.199 --> 01:50:24.159
recommendation which is what we do. The end responsible party for the growth in Apka and the infrastructure failures or lack thereof or the rapid growth without the proper infrastructure lies on the city council not the planning

378
01:50:24.159 --> 01:50:40.960
commission. I hope that's crystal clear >> and I quite frankly take offense at that and so with that I will thank Mr. How for his efforts and I thank everybody on the board in the planning commission and this will be my last meeting. I officially resign effective immediately.

379
01:50:40.960 --> 01:50:58.320
I will not be put in that position and I don't think any of our planning commission members should be and I'm glad Commissioner Ruth is here to hear that. >> Well, all I can say is I'm sorry to hear that. uh chairman, but I want to thank you for your eight years of service.

380
01:50:58.320 --> 01:51:14.560
Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. >> Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you addressing that and acknowledging it because I think that point of clarity, that point of credibility is extremely important for us um who are volunteering to serve in these roles also as we you

381
01:51:14.560 --> 01:51:29.280
know work hand in hand and love our city and and knowing that the final say of approval is not up to us. So thank you tremendously for your service and for um acknowledging that and stating that so thank you.

382
01:51:29.280 --> 01:51:59.119
>> I would also like thank you as well. So I really I've always been the type of person that I don't always go by what I hear. I wait to see exactly what's being said. I

383
01:51:59.119 --> 01:52:29.760
receive nothing from the city that advis to reconsider. I think that sometimes people look at things from a different angle and in this case maybe it was not knowing exactly what we do what our job was because as you I've always felt that

384
01:52:29.760 --> 01:52:47.360
our position is just recommendation we're we're an advisory to city council and that's it we can't make it happen if we want to and in most cases when we have denied it it's still so I would also ask to reconsider

385
01:52:47.360 --> 01:53:03.840
>> and I appreciate that But unfortunately, I think that the circumstance is not that the the the concern is or how can I phrase this? Um I don't I don't necessarily believe that the mayor and the city council don't understand where the end responsibility

386
01:53:03.840 --> 01:53:19.840
lies, but I think it was cast upon us for whatever reason. And I life's too short. I've done this for eight years and I've not been never been treated with anything but respect. And so at this point now I'm I'm getting old. I

387
01:53:19.840 --> 01:53:35.159
ain't going to put up with it. I don't need it. But I appreciate that. >> With that being said, I will say thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Anyone else? Meeting adjourned.