[music] Hey, [music] hey, hey. Heat up >> [music] >> here. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music]
[music] [music] [music] >> Happy [music] birthday. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] >> Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. [music] [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
>> Heat. Heat. [music] Hey. Hey. Hey. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat.
[music] Hey, Heat. Heat up here. Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music]
>> Good afternoon and welcome to the June 22 2nd 2026 meeting of the Orlando City Council. We're going to begin today's proceedings today with the invocation and pledge of allegiance offered and led by Commissioner Roger Chapen. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh please bow your
heads if you would like to. Heavenly Father, we give thanks for the city of Orlando, a community blessed with vibrant neighborhoods, dedicated public servants, thriving businesses, beautiful parks and lakes, and people from every walk of life who choose to call this place home. As we gather today, we are
mindful that many families recently celebrated Father's Day. We give thanks for the fathers, the grandfathers, mentors, the coaches, the teachers, and the role models whose guidance, sacrifice, and example helped shape future generations.
We also remember those who celebrated without their fathers, fathers who celebrated without their children, and families carrying the weight of loss. May they find comfort, strength, and peace in the memories they cherish and the love that endures.
As our nation commemorates 250 years of the American experience, we give thanks for the generations who have served our country and helped preserve our freedom. We especially pray for the men and women in our armed force armed forces serving away from home today. Watch over them and their families. Grant this council
wisdom, humility, and grace. Help us listen with open minds, treat one another with respect, and always place the needs of our community above our own. May our decisions today honor those who came before us and help create a brighter future for those who will follow. Amen.
>> Amen. >> United States of America >> and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay, let's call the meeting to order.
Madame clerk, would you call the role and make a determination of quorum, please? >> Commissioner Kane >> here. >> Commissioner Ortiz >> here. >> Commissioner Chapen >> here. >> Commissioner Sheen, >> here. >> Commissioner Rose, >> here. >> Commissioner Burns >> here. Mayor Dyer >> here. >> Mayor, you have a quorum with all
members present. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh, first item business is consideration of minutes from the June 8th, 2026 city council to interview and workshop meetings. Motion by Commissioner Ortiz, second by Commissioner Rose. All in favor indicate
so by saying I. I. >> Those opposed. And so the motion carries. We have no awards presentations today, so we'll go right into the mayor's comments. And uh before we have our next meeting, Commissioner Sheen's
birthday will arrive on July 6th. Commissioner Ortiz, can you help us here? [laughter] >> There we go. >> Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you.
Happy birthday, dear. >> Happy birthday to you. [applause] >> All right. Two days after Commissioner or two days before Commissioner Sheen's historic birthday, we also have a
historic event which is the 250th anniversary of the founding of our country. and we are going to have a spectacular fireworks at the fountain display and I would invite everybody there. We have food vendors, kids play zone festivities throughout the day and the fireworks
display will be at 9:10 p.m. sharp. I have two things on the agenda today. One is uh fire station 5 relocation. We are going to consider the purchase of three properties along Crystal Lake and Taylor Avenue near the Sodto Target for the uh
future replacement of Fire Station 5 which has been serving our community for over 70 years um and was instrumental in our response to Pulse. Uh the other one is a lap agreement, local agency program
agreement. We have FDOT, which uh I think we've been working on since I have been mayor and that is for Virginia Drive, Forest Avenue, and Corine Drive. It's a 2.6 mile corridor that um is going to be beautiful when we finish
this project. That we're going to move on to the consent agenda, which is a number of items acted upon through a single vote of council. We give each of the members of council an opportunity to comment on items on the consent agenda as well as to update you on important happenings from the districts. We rotate
the order that we do that and today Commissioner Chapen is first up. Thank you, Mayor. Uh I know we've got a lot of people here for a lot of important issues, so I'm going to keep my comments brief. Um, I would would like to say that I had the opportunity last week to participate in several events honoring
the victims taken from us in the Pulse tragedy as we celebrated and marked the 10-year anniversary. I want to thank all of the city staff who helped organize these commemorations. Each was beautiful and meaningful. And I particularly want to thank Mayor
Dyer and Commissioner Shien uh for the leadership that you've displayed since that tragic day and even until today. Um I will skip over some of my other comments, but I also also wanted to highlight item 13K1, which is again the
agreement for the FDOT resolution for construction on Kurin Drive. Uh, I'm excited to see that this long awaited project is finally going to move forward. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Sheen. >> Uh, thank you, mayor. Um, and thank you for helping me celebrate my Medicare
birthday. I'm proud to have made it this long. I didn't think I was going to live this long. I would have taken better care of myself. Um, so anyway, on the agenda today, um, there is the 3D2, the HPB minutes with concerns over the ordinance that we're going to be reading today.
today and I'll have more comments later on that. Um, Corine Drive again that that goes through district three and four. This is a very important corridor and I'm glad to see they were finally going to do something because this was a this was a place where they they widened
Virginia on a weird way to to get the railroad to get tanks and bombs and things like that in the Naval Training Center. Well, because of that, it's unusually wide and we have a lot of speeding problems and everything like that. So narrowing this down, actually Virginia Drive is wider than I4 in some
places. So narrowing this down, doing this project is going to make it a lot more pedestrian friendly. I'm glad to share this uh project with my colleague and maybe see this coming to fruition before I leave. Hopefully at least some pro process on project to see some
progress on the project. But um you know, it's it's very well needed and I'm delighted to see the hybrid beacons. Those are very important because um it's it's a very dangerous place to walk. I walk it every single day. Um also on the agenda on the CRA, we on we hang Christmas lights. I'm glad that they're
adding the Yola House. The guys that were doing that got a little upset because people kept vandalizing their light his their lights and I understand them being concerned, but that's what happens in a public park. So, we're just going to go ahead and pick that up. And I just want to point out that we have two restaurant um
uh incentives on the agenda today. we are having investment in downtown and uh we should be understanding that there is investment happening in downtown unlike what's been said and a lot of the things that's that have been going on. So um again that's all I had and uh thank you
so much >> Commissioner Rose. >> Good afternoon mayor commissioners and everyone in the audience. Um few things uh if you haven't been downstairs to check out the portraits the city of Orlando is hosting uh portraits of pulse. It's a exhibition of the 49 um
victims from the post tragedy. It'll be until August 23rd. Uh thank you Flynn Dobs and the team for um continuing to keep our gallery going and um commemorating and celebrating the lives who were taken from us. Um, I want to thank EA. Um, so every year, uh, as you,
for those that don't know, um, EA Sports is right here in the Pmore community and, um, part of their community impact is they, uh, when the games come out, they bring our youth in. So, we had a football competition and they continue to engage the youth with, um,
getting their feedback and playing the game. Um, it's a whole big thing where they they make a whole like collage. I don't know if if we go back to the days where we got PlayStation games physically. Um, they had a cover. So EA does like a whole cover for um the kids. So I make sure to incorporate Commissioner Ortiz when I do anything. I
make sure the Englewood kid zone is part of it. So I don't just do the three zones that um are in the district. Um so Englewood came in second place. Um but uh I think it was a little bit competition with Mercy Drive, Holen Heights, and Piermore playing um college
football sports. Um recently around the city in the area we celebrated Junth. This is a day that marks the end of slavery in the United States and honors the resilience, strength, and contributions of black Americans throughout our nation's history. As we reflect on the journey toward freedom
and equality, let us also recommit ourselves to building communities where opportunity, justice, and dignity are accessible to all. I celebrated several events. Um, and first I want to thank the Office of Community Affairs for leading the charge on a joint community resource fair with Commissioner Burns
and myself at the Grand Avenue uh neighborhood center. Thank you to FPR for making it a seamless activity. Thank you Rodney and team. Um, I joined the Pine Hills Community Council for a cleanup in the Pine Hills corridor. Um, I participated in a stop the violence
golf cart rally with um, a promoter called Another Chance. So ultimately we go from the Pine Hills community to Paramore and we stop at various apartment complexes and talk to the youth about stopping the violence. We kind of give them information about programs and we also give them skateboards and helmets um for them to
have some activities. Um I also want to thank Reggie Miguel and the team for 100 Black Men Gayla. Um for those that don't know and have never experienced 100 Black Men is a wonderful organization that mentors our youth and sends them off to college. um not only uh high
school students graduated but also making sure that the alum they keep in they continue to give scholarships and keep them u motivated for successful future. Um so may we continue to learn from the past celebrate progress and continue to work together toward a [clears throat] brighter future.
So for those that don't know um the small enterprise off small business enterprise office was kicked off um on the third Monday of every month at the NEC at the Fashion Square Mall. There is a collaborative meeting that's held with Orange County and the city of Orlando.
Uh AP April 21st, we launched the SBE program um which provides small and locally owned businesses in the metropolitan area opportunities to participate in city development and procurement contracts. I am proud to say that as of today, we have certified 59
businesses that are in our directory. 28 of these 59 are businesses that are registered with the county. And so for those I know that's a big milestone here in our region. Um for anyone doing business in the city, it has been a long time where you would just be certified with one entity versus the other. Now if
you are certified with both Orange County and the city of Orlando to do business seamlessly. Um we will continue to work to make sure we support our local b small businesses. Um Commissioner Chapen and I um cut the ribbon. For those that don't know, there
is two now. There are two Coke distribution centers here in um district 5 and uh three. The new center open 180,000 square feet. Um warehouse uh $84 million investment here in the [clears throat] city of Orlando. There
are job opportunities available and I will be posting about those for anyone looking for employment. On to the agenda. Um, I will give comments about the historic preservation once we get to that ordinance. But 3D5 and 4D, I'm
proud to support Tropics Lounge as we um bring another small business and restaurant into the downtown corridor. Um 3E1, so I don't know for those who haven't been here, I sit on the Orange County Safety Swim safety task force. And so I'm glad that we are receiving
some funds to help 160 children in the area to help with swimming lessons through our FPR. And 4C, I'm glad to support Blue Coast Burrow LLC going to 410 North Crunch Avenue. And that's all I have. Mayor, [clears throat] >> thank you, Commissioner Commissioner
Barnes. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor, and good afternoon, fellow commissioners, as well as all who are in attendance today. Um, want to announce on June 17th, I hosted my district-wide town hall. Uh, glad to say that there were over 150 uh,
participants. Um, and this was a time that we uh, showcased what was going on in the district. Had the, uh, several of the city departments available to answer questions. Uh, the Richmond Heights neighborhood won the award for the most attendees. Uh and so again, they will be
getting a financial award that goes to support their neighborhood association. Uh I'd like to say thank you to the Smith Center staff, our meal sponsor, as well as our presenter OU the reliable the reliable one who shared great information with our community about how
they can conserve, save money as well as other uh services that are offered by OU. also the supervisor of elect elections uh elect uh supervisor caster dental as well as our entire uh city team who tabled economic development s
emergency management solid waste housing FPR code enforcement as well as public works and OPD. Uh during that district 6 town hall I did give a snapshot of kind of uh district 6 to date and it showed uh some of the activity that has
happened since I was elected in 2020. So, real briefly, uh we um $6.67 million were received by homeowners in District 6 for housing rehabilitation. That's 106 households that received funding to
assist with home renovations. The average award was 62,000 with the largest award being 131,000. So, I will encourage anyone who's interested in this program, we still have funding. uh please reach out to my office or either
of the commission's office because this is not a District 6 initiative. It's a citywide initiative. Uh but we've just been very uh aggressive in District 6. So again, uh excited that we've been able to help 106 households access $6.6
million in home renovations. Also, since uh 2020, there's been $63.5 million uh in grants received specifically for District 6. 38 grants uh 10 grants exceeding $1 million. So again, thank you to our grants team here at the city.
They do a great job in securing this funding for uh for our districts. Also, we awarded uh over $75,000 in uh scholarships to help our students with their educational endeavors. 57 plus scholarships for totaling over
$75,000. Also, when we talk about affordable housing, 71 affordable units have been completed with another 353 affordable housing units in the development pipeline. Over 5,000 backpacks and uh supported several uh
senior centers. So, since 2020, uh your district commissioner has been uh has been busy and I look forward to continuing uh to pile on to these numbers. Um, as uh, Commissioner Rose mentioned, I had the pleasure of
attending the Junth resource fair. So, I'd like to thank uh, Marcy and her team for pulling together this uh, this important re resource fair. A lot of good information was shared. We had a lot of good vendors and I think a good time was had uh, by all. Uh, just a few
upcoming events. uh on June 23rd uh at the National Entrepreneur Center, how to do business with the city of Orlando workshop that will happen from uh again at the National Entrepreneur Center from uh 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. So, if you're interested in learning how to do
business with the city, please come to that uh to that session. Also, and this is really a push for small and local business businesses to be certified as Commissioner Rose uh just mentioned. Also, on July 1st uh at 6:30 at the
Grand Avenue Neighborhood Center, we will be having a community meeting regarding the Petemont Yard Apartments. Uh this is a community meeting where the uh community can hear about the development, provide ask questions, provide their feedback, and just learn more on the timing of that development.
Uh also on July 3rd, balling after dark. Uh this is a uh opportunity for our Orlando Police Department and our youth to compete in a uh in a safe environment. This is happening at uh the next one is at Grand Avenue at 8:00. So
if you know of youth who uh are looking for things to do, encourage them to go to Balling after dark. Uh, also uh on July 8th, we're planning for the District 6 OPD community meeting with uh Chief Smith. That will happen at the
James R. Smith Center at 6:30. Uh, and then also my uh continue to have my satellite office hours uh on the second Wednesday at the James R. Smith Center, on the fourth Wednesday at the Grand Avenue Neighborhood Center, and on
the third Friday at the Elclaia Allen Senior Center. And mayor, I do have uh some comments on some of the ordinance, but I'll save those until then. And that completes my updates. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Commissioner Keane. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh good afternoon,
everyone here in person and also online. Congratulations, uh Commissioner Sheen, on your birthday soon to come. Uh last week uh my office hosted the first meeting of our ebike safety working group bringing together OPD OFD Orange
County staff, city of Orlando staff, Neor's children's hospital, local HOA leaders, and principles from uh several of our schools, uh middle schools and high schools in District 1. I want to thank Senator Carl Sceral Smith and Representative Rita Harris for taking
time out of their busy summer to join the conversation as well. It was an important step in developing solutions that improve safety for everyone, especially our young children. I appreciate everyone who took time to participate and contribute to this collaborative effort, and it will
continue uh we'll continue to have these meetings throughout the summer and during the school year. Uh mayor, on the consent agenda today, I'd like to highlight uh 3D6. First is uh temporary use permit for BEP at the Lake Nona Town Center. Beep is an autonomous mobility technology company
headquartered in the heart of district 1 in Lake Nona. I'm very excited to see them expanding their operations and adding more transportation options in Orlando. And 3J1 like to share my excitement for the new Southeast Government Services Building. Uh today we will vote to
approve Seth Palmer and Madison Smith for their creative services on sculptures and interior mixed media paintings. And I can't wait to see the final product based on their portfolios. It should be a key feature of my new district office. And with that, mayor, that's all I have for this week.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Ortiz. >> Mayor, you're going to love me in lie of the amount of people we have here that they came for a particular purpose. I'm going to keep my comments for next city council. And I'm just going to move to adopt the uh agenda. >> Fabulous. >> Thank you.
>> Motion by Commissioner Ortiz. Who had the second? >> Commissioner Rose. Um all in favor indicate so by saying I. I. Those opposed? And so the motion carries. Okay. If you're just here for um consent agenda, now would be a good time to make
your way out. Anybody up for that? All right. You're in for the long haul then. Okay. Okay, without objection, we'll recess the city council meeting and we will convene the CRA meeting. Uh 4A is meeting minutes of the advisory board
from May 22nd. Motion by Commissioner Rose, second by Commissioner Shei. And all in favor indicate so by saying I I. >> Those opposed. So the motion carries. All right. David 4B. >> Yes. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Mayor. Good afternoon, commissioners. Uh so Commissioner Sheen,
as you mentioned, this item is an amendment to our WeHang Christmas lights contract for this upcoming year. I'm happy to say that uh we are again going to be expanding the offerings that are happening throughout downtown uh for the holidays. Um one of which is a new retro neon zone uh uh which you may say that
doesn't sound very Christmy, but uh it will definitely be Christmas themed and there will also be several interactive components to to get kids engaged with neon seesaws as well as neon stump pads. So excited to add that. Some other components that uh will be bringing the
festivities down into the core as well as into our Thornton Park district are lights throughout the trees that are going to go from Lake Yola all the way down into our Thornton Park business district. Doing the same along Magnolia uh in our CBD to really connect all of our uh festivities with what's going on
at the front yard festival. Uh and we'll have some other uh installations right at the history center where we have a full interactive mapping of the history center to just add to that holiday cheer. Uh the total cost of the contract is $274,439 and I'm happy to address any questions.
>> Second. >> Motion by Commissioner Rose, second by Commissioner Sheen. Discussion hearing none. All in favor indicate so by saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed and motion carries. David. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh our next item uh is a restaurant program. As Commissioner
Sheen mentioned, we have two restaurants uh that we're considering today. Uh the first of which uh is uh Blue Coast Burrow LLC uh which is not the name of uh the restaurant. It's Devonte. It's a French themed restaurant. It's going into the ground floor of the society building which is directly across the
street from the courthouse. Uh it'll be a first generation space there. They've leased about 3,000 square ft uh and have a number of other establishments. One of them uh being Blue Coast Burrito in the packing district. Uh they own a coffee establishment uh in Claremont as well as several others not only in Central
Florida uh but the state as well. Uh they'll be making just under $800,000 of improvements in that space of which they qualify for about $313,000 of CRA funding towards those tenant improvements in addition to $50,000 in rental assistance uh for a total award
of about $363,000. And I'm happy to address any questions. Second >> motion by Commissioner Rose, second by Commissioner Sheen. Discussion hearing none. All in favor indicate so by saying I. I. >> Those opposed. [clears throat] Motion
carries. And 4 D. Our next item is another restaurant that was also mentioned during the opening comments. This is for Tropics. Uh so Tropics is a Jamaican themed restaurant coming into uh uh the ground floor where Pine and Orange intersect. So, uh, the last, uh, establishment you may know that occupied
that space was TD Bank. Um, they, uh, own multiple of the restaurants as well. Uh, they are here in the Orlando area. It's Negril Jamaican Restaurant on Kirkman as well as, uh, on Silverstar. Uh, they are also spending about $785,000 in order to build out and
retrofit that space. Uh, for which they qualify for $210,000 in tenant improvement allowance uh, assistance from the CRA and an additional 50,000 in first year's rental abatement. So the total award from the CRA is 260,000. >> Second.
>> Motion by Commissioner Rose, second by Commissioner Sheen. Discussion >> hearing none. All in favor of the motion indicates so by saying I. I. >> Those opposed. And so the motion carries. Further business. David. >> That is all. Mayor. >> Thank you. Then we will stand adjourned
as to the CRA without objection and we will reconvene the city council meeting. Madame clerk. That brings us to hearings 9A. You want to read that for us? >> One moment. Mayor, >> I surprised you. That doesn't need to be read. I'll read it then. Third amendment
to the second amended and restated development order for Florida Hospital Orlando development of regional impact district three. >> Move approval. >> Motion by Commissioner Chapen. Second by Commissioner Sheen. Discussion. Oh,
actually I have no request for public comment on this. Madam clerk, can request? >> No public comment, mayor. >> Okay, then the hearing shall close. All in favor of the motion indicates by saying I. I. >> Those opposed and so the motion carries.
Okay. This one you can read, madam clerk, which is hearings ordinances on second reading. Ordinance number 2026-18, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Orlando, Florida, relating to the downtown historic preservation overlay district, imposing a temporary moratorium for 36 months only
requirements, processing and consideration of certificates of appropriateness prior to the erection, alteration, restoration, or demolition of exempted historic landmarks or structures within the downtown historic preservation overlay district. adopting findings of fact providing for extension of early termination of the temporary
moratorum and procedures providing legislative findings and for separability correction of scrier's errors and an effective date. >> Okay, motion >> second >> and a second. I want to thank everybody that is here to speak on this matter.
Um, it's a testament to how much people care about Orlando and our neighborhoods and our history. And also want to thank our historic preservation board for the great work that they have done in protecting Orlando's historic neighborhoods, particularly the five predominantly residential historic
districts. But our downtown district presents a different set of challenges and revitalizing largecale commercial buildings in the heart of the central business district requires balancing of historic character with economic viability. and long-term investment. The
proposal before us temporarily shifts the review of projects to the appearance review board, which is the same board that reviews all the other major commercial projects throughout downtown every day. It creates a more consistent, predictable process for owners while
continuing to respect the historic character that makes this area unique. [clears throat] Predictability counts and it often is the deciding factor on whether an investor chooses to move a project forward. This proposal does not eliminate demolition protections or
elate or erase Orlando's history. Requests for demolition still have multiple layers of approval, including review by the historic preservation office. This temporary change is designed to remove barriers to investment while preserving everything that makes this district special.
Commissioners, I know that you received a copy of a letter from the Department of State about this possibil possibly impacting our status as a certified local government. I want to be clear, the city attorney has reviewed the letter, believes the action would not jeopardize our certification. However,
in an abundance of caution, these temporary procedures will not take effect until August 10th to align with approval of the proposed rebate program to incentivize reuse and renovation. We remain committed to historic preservation. We're not looking to imple
and we are looking to implement an incentive program and continuing to have HPV review of improvements in the other five primarily residential historic districts. David, you ready? David Burrilla, our executive director, CRA,
and Jason Burton, planning division manager, will lay the process out. >> Thank you, Mayor. get this up here. There we go. All right. Thank you again, mayor and commissioners. U just wanted to review some of the items discussed during the
first hearing several weeks ago. Um um as you remember, we talked a lot about investing in downtown. Uh we're in in an exciting time in downtown's history. Uh we have an immense amount of project an immense amount of work all moving
forward to change the trajectory of the downtown that we have into something uh that I know we all we truly proud of. All of that work is being guided by the DTO action plan. Uh so as you know uh the DTO action plan um started in the context of really charting an actionable
course uh to make sure that our downtown was everything not just that uh we wanted it to be but what we knew it could be. Um it was vision-driven uh it was researchbased and it's a strategic framework of actions 14 specifically um
that start to take down block by block uh the context and the character of downtown and structured in a way that can ultimately uh be utilized for decades to come. Uh so some of those projects uh which you will know of are things like the canopy which is going to
occur underneath I4. Uh we have our immense uh Lake Yiola Gateway project uh that will be starting here soon. Art squared uh which is already delivered right there on Orange Avenue which is a great place to go uh during the day or or even for an early evening. Uh our Lake Yola master plan uh which we are on
the cusp of starting as well. Uh and you see a number of other projects along the right hand side which I'll highlight a little bit later in the presentation. Um, we also talked about just some of of the large-scale investments that have occurred in downtown over the last 15 years. Um, these specifically are
investments of over 5 million. Uh, those are the yellow uh areas really that you see on this map to help orient yourself. You can see Lake Eyola there uh kind of in the center. Um um and then our central business district is really highlighted by those three pink spines.
Uh um that is Orange Avenue obviously, Magnolia and then Roslin. Uh the pink on this map um showcases really all the investments that the city and the CRA are making um to really change the aspect of our downtown. It's the two-way
of streets, it's the canopy, all of which is focused uh on the core. Um and what you can see by this map is is the context of where that activity from a private perspective has been focused on uh from a large scale. Um, if you did
take this map back another 10 years, made it a or another 5 years, make it a 20 year or 25 year map, you would see additional um growth as Commissioner Sheen pointed out last time with the plaza uh as well as 55 West, which would be uh in that that green area. Uh, but the context is really of our of our
recent past, uh, we've seen growth. We're very proud of it. It's over two billion dollars and over 20 projects that have come into our downtown and making it all it is today. Um and we've heard and seen different contexts uh really in the core and wanted to make sure we're aligned as we continue uh to
chart the course forward. Um so what's happening right now? So uh as you know uh um we have Magnolia underway as we speak. We're about 60% complete on that. We'll hopefully be done here uh in the late summer, early fall. Uh in just the coming weeks, we're going to be starting
our work on Church Street. Uh that's that picture on the bottom left there. um literally taking building face to building phase and creating a pedestrianfriendly walkable environment um that we can ultimately hope to host uh not only many large scale investments but just the
day-to-day activities when you want to come downtown with your friends with your family uh to enjoy the core of our city in an active and vibrant space. Um, just above that you see 30 South Orange, which is on the corner of Pine and Orange, uh, which has been a vacant lot for many years, but it was a part of an
acquisition that the CRA was successful in making. Um, with that, we're looking to to bring a great, uh, uh, respbit location with a park, uh, that provides a little bit of a getaway uh, uh, from all the hustle and bustle to that extent that might be around you uh, in the core. Uh, to the right uh, is is
probably the biggest project that is the 2-waying of Orange and Rosland. again, taking uh building face to building face and really all of the area uh that the city controls and making sure we're doing everything we can do to set the table uh for a successful and vibrant
downtown. Um and then the other project down on the right, that's one North Orange. Um so, uh it's often referred to as one of Orlando's original skyscrapers. Uh it was another uh property that the CRA was successful in purchasing uh in order to reintroduce it
uh uh to downtown. And I think it's a it's a great context uh uh to really what we're discussing today. Um this building in and of itself uh sat vacant for probably almost 20 years. The the last occupying owner, so to speak, that had it activated was the county. Um and
when they sold it, it sold to an investor who who was never able to to make that project work. It then sold to it went to foreclosure. Uh it went to another investor who ultimately saw the same challenges. Um the CRA was successful in purchasing that uh um because we knew that we needed it to be
active. We needed to play a role uh in the downtown that we know we wanted to have and we're getting ready to release that to the market later uh this month uh and and ultimately hope to get to partner uh with a developer on that uh before the end of the year. Um and that context is great. It also kind of shows
us the challenge that as much as we know we would like to do this for every building that may have some um deterioration and things like that in downtown, we don't have the means to do it. We need to make sure uh that we have the right policies and programs in place that the private sector can kind of pick up uh where we have to put the baton
down so we all can work together on moving downtown forward. So, some of the the the challenges, so to speak, that we've heard uh both from members of the community uh as well as property owners and business owners um are really what we want from downtown. I think we're all
aligned on that context. Uh um one of the top things that I hear is that people want more activity. Uh people want more vibrancy uh in that context. And I tell you when you talk to the business owners or even the property owners, um they want that too. uh uh they also are asking us to consider uh
more predictability from that side so that they can make investments into the core um that will work. A lot of the properties uh um that have been under discussion for years we find themselves and to be some context of not being set up in the right way for businesses of
today um and are wanting to make investments so they can sure to activate them. Uh we all know the best way to preserve buildings is is to have them activated um and and not be vacant and and left to deteriorate over time. Uh and we're ultimately uh um looking to have a district uh that is vibrant and
active and that all can enjoy. Uh so now I'll turn it over to Jason to to talk a little bit about the review process. >> Afternoon commissioners, mayor. I'm here to explain the alternative processes that are proposed in this ordinance to be put into place and in um alternative
to the historic preservation review process. Just to note um this is to provide a consistent review and process for large-scale commercial projects. There's a proposed temporary pause on the need for a certificate of appropriateness from the historic preservation board. As an alternative,
the appearance review board is the proposed authority and they are responsible for reviewing all the different proposals outside the historic district within the downtown within the CRA and that's proposed for the construction and renovation of buildings
within this downtown historic district for 36 months. The ARB like mentioned reviews all the other projects that are within the within the CR the community redevelopment area. What what is being utilized by the ARB is the downtown
design guidelines used to review projects. Those are based on general urban design principles rather than the more specific secretary of the interior standards for historic preservation. The goal is an adaptive reuse and revitalization of different buildings in
the historic district. The goal is not demolition of buildings. Permits for any demolition of buildings would still require staff level historic preservation review. And I explained that more detail at our last hearing. And certainly approval of demolition
cannot occur until a permit is issued for a replacement project which still requires ARB review. Um and I'll turn it back over to David to explain the incentive program. Uh so some of the desired outcomes uh to that extent uh that we hope to be able
to achieve and see uh over the course uh of this item is we really want to as the mayor put uh balance find that appropriate balance uh between in preserving historic preservation and also the long-term sustainability uh and economic development that we're looking
for to have a vibrant and active downtown. We want to encourage properties to be invested in. we want don't want them to deteriorate over time and we want to make sure that they are occupied um so the community can benefit and get exposure to them uh and partake in everything that uh they they play a
role in in our downtown. Uh we want to en encourage uh creative and broad reuse of properties uh in downtown uh encourage property owners to redevelop parcels with the highest zoning uh the highest area of zoning in our city is our downtown. Uh and if we're going to ultimately continue to meet some of our
growth projection uh uh calculations, um we need to make sure that we can utilize those areas uh that are zoned for the highest intensity. Um and we want to make sure that our investments uh with the DTO action plan, as I mentioned, over $200 million, which uh is probably
the largest coordinated public investment in the history of our downtown. um doesn't stop where we put our shovels down. Uh that that the private sector can pick up uh at those lines that we have, what we don't control uh on their buildings and their properties. Um so that all of that uh it
goes to be about uh an active, vibrant and exciting downtown. Um so with that, I'm happy to address any questions. >> David, did you skip over the incentive program? >> I might have actually. Mayor, there it is. I I clicked I clicked uh enter one too many times. Thank you very much. Um,
one of the components and you mentioned this uh in your earlier comments uh mayor is especially from the the CRA's perspective uh we are committed to historic preservation. Uh that is why we ultimately took on one north orange because uh we knew we had to have a front row seat in seeing something of that caliber get returned to the market.
Uh uh but with this as well the CRA uh uh will consider its July the CRA advisory board will consider its July meeting. Uh and then you all sitting at CRA will consider in your August meeting um a a program that will look to come alongside property owners to preserve
the historic elements and character of properties. Um with that uh what we anticipate that to look like uh is having a 10-year uh tax increment rebate to between 50 and 75% of the added value uh by those investments. But what we're really looking for there is for those
property owners to preserve uh the historic and the architectural quality uh and elements of those buildings so they continue to play a role uh not only in our core uh but also uh in the history of downtown Orlando. Uh and now I'm welcome to take any questions.
>> Okay, questions and questions only. >> Commissioner Chapen. >> Mayor, you mentioned the letter we received from the Department of State. When I read it, um, some of the examples that were given felt like they were pretty far back in our rearview mirror.
Um, what kind of dollars are we talking about? Do we know? >> We've received two grants under that program in the last five or six years and they were grants of I think 50,000 each. That what we got out of it was we didn't have to match the 50,000.
>> I'll be addressing my I'll be addressing that in my PowerPoint. >> Okay. So, it's been nominal. Let's just say that. >> There have been other grants that aren't tied to that that were listed in one of the articles in the newspaper. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Further questions, Commissioner Burns? >> Yeah. Um, may I had a question. It it mentioned a 30-day um notification time period that we we have not complied with and I know that we were going to delay this the
effectiveness for about 30 days. Would that would that allow us to >> that we don't think that's applicable but we have delayed the implementation of the ordinance 30 days so it would comply with that. So, so delayed 30 days
would comply with the state's requirement to notify. >> We don't think we need to comply with that. However, in abundance of caution, that would comply. >> Okay. So, again, delaying it will make us in compliant with the 30-day
notification. >> That would be legal advice. Yes, >> that's the legal advice we've received, right? Okay. Yes. Thank you. >> Any others? Okay. Turns out we do have a few people that would like to speak on this matter.
So there are 32 people and what are 32 requests. So what I will do is I'll call three names at a time. Um you'll come to the podium, give us your name and your residents address and you will then have three minutes. So the first three are
Mark Line, Dean Hill, and Katie Shook. Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. Uh, I come before you as a preservationist, but not a hardcore preservationist. I also believe in my community and want
to see it grow and prosper. But I want to remind you of how important historic preservation has been in many other communities. Park Avenue today is a flourishing community in Winter Park. They have historic
properties. Winter Garden has prospered considerably in last in past years with Plant Street with historic properties. Our own, excuse me, Thornton Park does very well
with historic properties. And if we want to reach out to South Beach, if they had destroyed those art deco buildings many years ago, we wouldn't have what South Beach is today.
And the same thing is true in Tampa. So, we know that historic properties can be used profitably and for economic development. I want to say to David, thank you for a
good presentation from the DTO, but I also have read that very carefully and I found nothing in that report which was well researched that said anything about historic properties being an impediment to economic development.
So, I'm hoping today that we can look for perhaps a different solution or at least the process to help us find a better solution than to put at risk what I'm concerned about particularly are the
properties on Church Street. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Dean Hill, Katie Shook, Jennifer Evans. >> Good afternoon, Mayor, Council. Good to see some of you again. My name is Dean Hill and I'm the interim interim executive director for the Orlando
chapter of the American Institute for Architects and also the Orlando Foundation for Architects and I would like to personally invite you and everybody in this room to the opening of the brand new Orlando Center for Architecture and Design or as OAD as we like to call it. Uh we will be opening
at 150 North uh Orange A in the Fulcrrim building and we hope to have a soft opening sometime in August. On behalf of the members of AIA Orlando, we respectfully request reconsideration of the proposed three-year moratorum that would suspend historic preservation
board review of planned development projects within downtown Orlando. AIA Orlando supports the city's efforts to encourage investment, redevelopment, and revitalization within within our urban core. As architects, planners, and design professionals, we understand the
importance of fostering growth, expanding housing opportunities, and maintaining Orlando's economic vitality. We share the city's vision for a thriving downtown and recognize the need to remove barriers that may hinder thoughtful development. However, we are
concerned that the proposed mor moratorum may move too quickly and eliminate an important layer of professional review before alternative solutions have been fully explored. Historic preservation has consistently proven to be a catalyst for economic
development and urban revitalization. Across the country, communities have leveraged historic preservation policies, adaptive reuse incentives, and preservation review processes to stimulate investment, increase housing opportunities, enhance walkability, and
strengthen neighborhood identity. Historic preservation is not an obstacle to de redevelopment. It is often one of the tools that makes redevelopment successful. As Orlando continues to evolve, we have an opportunity to demonstrate that progress and
preservation can work together. We believe the best outcomes emerge when diverse perspectives are brought to the table and when decisions are informed by thoughtful analysis rather than accelerated timelines. We respectfully ask the city council to reconsider the
proposed moratorum, engage stakeholders in a collaborative discussion regarding long-term strategies for downtown redevelopment and historic preservation. Together, we can develop an approach that strengthens Orlando's future while honoring the history and character that
contribute to its identity. Thank you for your consideration and your continued service to our community. We welcome the opportunity to participate in future discussions and insist in de and assist in developing solutions that Orlando residents can be proud of for
generations to come. Sinc sincerely, Lindseay Pian Perez, AIA lead fellow and 2026 chapter president for AIA Orlando. Thank you. >> Okay. Katie Shook, Jennifer Evans, Craig Usler.
>> Good afternoon, Mayor um and commissioners. My name is Katie Shook. I live at 14 North Lona Boulevard. >> Sorry. Uh my name is Katie Shook and I live at 14 North Lona Boulevard. Uh last year I bought my first home, which is a 100-year-old bungalow in one of
Orlando's historic districts. Um, I chose that home specifically because I love historic architecture and the character that older neighborhoods bring to our city. I understand why preservation matters and I believe we have a responsibility to protect the places that tell Orlando's stories. And that's exactly why I'm here today in
support of this proposal. As a homeowner, I want to see our historic neighborhoods preserved, but I also want to see our downtown thrive. The success of our neighborhoods and the success of our urban core are connected. A vibrant downtown makes Orlando a more desirable place to live, work, and invest, and
that benefits all of us. What I when I walk through downtown or the downtown historic district today, I don't just see beautiful buildings. I also see vacant storefronts um and underutilized spaces that could be filled with business businesses, restaurants, and activity. As someone
who's invested personally in a historic district and a historic home, I understand the importance of protecting our past. Um, but I also believe we have to create conditions where historic places can continue to be lived in, worked in, and enjoyed by future generations. I want to live in a city
where our historic neighborhoods are strong, our downtown is vibrant, and our oldest buildings are not sitting empty, but contributing to the life of our community every single day. That's why I encourage you to support this proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jennifer Evans, Craig
Gustler, Jill Vaughn. >> Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. My name is Jennifer Evans. I live at 520 East Church Street in downtown Orlando. I'm here to speak about my personal experience owning and restoring and
developing historic properties. For 28 years, I lived in a 170y old home that was on the National Trust. I bought a 100-year-old commercial building and I was a partner in developing or readaptive use of an old textile mill that was over a hundred years old, but
it was vacant for 30 years. I know firsthand that historic properties, whether home or commercial, are at their best use when they are occupied. I'm very passionate about historic preservation, but this new uh new review
process allows for adaptive reuse um for our most important uh anchors in our central business district. This new review process allows for architectural excellence, but also protects these buildings from being de demolished
because it will go through a robust review process, including the last vote of yours. So, my personal experience um and my passion supports historic preservation, but they are at their best when they're occupied. And so, I hope
that you will vote in favor of approving the moratorum so that these historic properties will be brought back to life, which is what we need in our city. Thank you. >> Thank you, Craig Usler. Giovon Tim Giuliani. >> Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners.
Uh Craig Usler, 800 North Orange Avenue, uh sweet 200 Orlando, Florida 32801. Um uh the first thing I'd like to say is is something I I said last time just in the sense that I I I respect uh all sides of this issue. It's it's an interesting
conundrum when you have everybody wants what's best for downtown. There's just sort of differing opinions on how to get there. Uh so that's actually quite interesting that both sides want the same thing. It's just a matter of what process you go through. And so, uh, I tried to keep that in mind as I've, as I've balanced my thoughts on this, as we
all want, uh, downtown to be better. Uh, I've spent my whole professional career, uh, in the real estate investment and development space in downtown Orlando. And, um, and I want to see it do well. And I I also understand and respect the idea that historical context plays. Uh,
I believe that this process we're putting forth is really kind of um, uh, the best approach to kind of swing the pendulum back a little bit. I think we're just a little bit out of balance on uh sort of the restrictions of what the historic preservation process does versus some of the economic development
objectives. Uh I want to be careful to point out that's not really a result of HPB. Um some of this has become about the HPB board and the people on that board. That's not what this is about. It it's the process and the rules with which that board is bound. Okay. So So a
private owner or developer walks into the office and says, "What can I do with my property?" and you're basically told not much. Um it's very restrictive what you're allowed to do. And so the vast majority of projects never make it to the HPB board. The the a project getting
rejected by the HPB board is almost it's just a very small number of the projects that are actually contemplated. So what happens is projects are essentially never starting because at staff level they just get sort of told what they can and can't do. And it's become I think
sadly it's become an impediment um to development. And so I'm not really even really happy about this. It's just the way it is and that's that's the way it's functioning. Uh so it's become sort of this this problem in the sense that you just can't get as much done as we would like. So that's really been my focus as I've thought about this over the past
couple weeks is a you know it's just a process really more at the staff level that needs to fix. And I think sort of by revising it the way we've talked about today we can get to a better uh and more balanced outcome. Thanks. Thank you, Jill Von, Tim Giuliani, Joe Nuniata.
>> Good afternoon, mayors, commissioners. Jill Vaughn, 333 South Garland Avenue, Orlando, Florida, 32801. I serve as the president and CEO of the Downtown Orlando Partnership. And from my office in the in the Truis Plaza, I
look out 5 days a week at the vacant buildings along Church Street. It's a visible reminder that some of the most important blocks in downtown Orlando have not seen investment or the activity that they deserve. I also personally have witnessed trespassing and vandalism
of these buildings from my office window. When properties remain unoccupied for years, they become more vulnerable to neglect and to deterioration. Vacancy does not protect these buildings or strengthen the district around them.
As someone who values history, architecture, and the character of downtown Orlando, I do not believe the answer is to disregard our historic resources. They are part of what makes downtown distinct. However, we also have
to ask whether the current process is helping these buildings find new life. That is why I'm here today in support of this temporary moratorum. It gives the city a defined period to evaluate a different review process while maintaining oversight and assessing the
results. The goal is to encourage thoughtful reinvestment and adaptive reuse on these buildings that have been vacant or underutilized for too long. When these buildings are occupied, they can gain they can once
again contribute to the life of downtown by supporting businesses and bringing people to the street. I recognize the concerns raised by residents and preservation advocates, but this is a temporary measure. It's not a decision to abandon preservation. It's an
opportunity to determine whether a different process can better support the protection of our historic assets and encourage economic development and the future of downtown Orlando, which I am sincerely passionate about. And for
those reasons, I respectfully support the approval of this ordinance. Thank you. >> Thank you. Tim Giuliani, Joe Nonziana, Jason Kelly. >> Good afternoon. Tim Giuliani, 810 Uclid Avenue. Good afternoon. I'm here to
speak on behalf of the Orlando Economic Partnership in support of this ordinance and the temporary suspension of the historic planning review of development in the central business district. We appreciate the opportunity to come together as you provided two weeks ago
to discuss this important issue and ultimately we all have the same goal which is creating a culturally vibrant downtown that anchors our regional economy. We commend the city for bold investments in the heart of downtown Orlando and leadership like this is
essential to catalyze the kind of economic development we all want in our urban core. However, to fully experience downtown's full potential, then we must ensure that private investment can be deployed, filling vacant offices and
storefronts, starting new businesses, and maximizing the city's public investments. We need to focus on adaptive reuse. Today, private development in the central business district has stalled and several buildings remain vacant. And it is rare
for a city to have this type of overlay in their downtown core, particularly a major city like ours. The proposed temporary suspension would streamline review and approval process and reduce that uncertainty to to bring more
projects for your review. Importantly, this is a measured approach striking a balance between the need for private investment and historic preservation. Alongside the potential incentives for adaptive reuse, it creates a window to
invest while respecting the historic urban fabric that defines our downtown. OEP values our partnership with the city and we look forward to continuing to work with you to improve our downtown. Thank you. Thank you, Joe Nunziata, Jason Kelly,
Steve Gerity. >> Good afternoon, mayor, commissioners, and staff. My name is Joe Nunat, and I serve as the CEO of Acasher Mortgage. My address is 189 South Orange Avenue, Sweet 900, Orlando 3281.
We're headquartered right in that location. We have about 700 employees. I also own and have owned multiple properties in the downtown historic district. I want to begin by saying that I care deeply about this city. Orlando has provided incredible opportunities
for my family, business, and for thousands of others who has chosen to invest their lives and livelihoods here in Orlando. I also believe we have reached an important move moment for downtown today. Too many storefronts sit empty. Too many buildings are
underutilized and too many people are choosing to spend their times elsewhere. As a business leaders whose company is headquartered here, I see the impact every day. The challenge is no longer simply preserving our past. It is ensuring that downtown remains vibrant,
relevant, and economically sustainable for future generations. Historic preservation plays an important role in protecting the character and identity of our city. But preservation and progress should not be viewed as competing priorities. In fact, they should work hand in hand. As a property
owner, I have experienced firsthand how lengthy and unpredictable the approval process can be and how it can unintentionally discourage investment, even for relatively modest improvements. When investors, business owners, and property owners face uncertainty,
projects are delayed, opportunities are lost, and buildings remain underutilized. I support this temporary change because I believe it creates more predictable paths for investment while still respecting the historic significance of these properties.
The best way to preserve a historic building is not to leave it untouched. It is to keep it occupied, maintained, and contributing to the life of the community. A thriving historic building filled with businesses, residents, and activity honors its legacy far more effectively
than a vacant one does. This proposal gives us an opportunity to encourage reinvestment, support adaptive reuse, and bring new energy to downtown Orlando. We can respect our history while creating the conditions for a stronger future. I support this effort because I believe in downtown Orlando,
and I want these historic buildings to remain not only a symbol of our past, but active contributors to our city's next chapter. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, Jason Kelly, Steve Gir Lana Gellzer. Good afternoon. I'm Jason Kelly of 526
South High Avenue. My great-grandparents, Amos Roberts and Bessie Wigglesworth, arrived downtown in 1925. More than a century later, our family is still here. I'm a proud fourth generation Orlando resident who loves a city and is fiercely protective of its
history. I'm president of the Lake Davis Greenwood Neighborhood Association, a graduate of the mayor's city academy, a member of the Mills 50 District Board of Directors and the chair of its design committee. I previously served two terms on the Lou Gardens board of trustees and
I'm now serving my second term on the historic preservation board, which is why I chose to speak today. Everyone gathered in these chambers cares deeply about Orlando's future and wants to see downtown thrive. As the historic preservation board approaches
its 50th anniversary, Orlando should be strengthening its commitment to preservation. Instead, this ordinance strips vital protections from the most iconic buildings in the oldest part of our city, opening the door to their loss.
That's a disservice to Orlando residents who trust us to safeguard our city's architectural heritage for future generations. We must not abandon that duty. These buildings were here long before us. If we do our job right, they'll
remain long after we're gone. How you vote today will help define your legacy. It is not too late to do the right thing. I urge you to vote against this unpopular ordinance and protect Orlando's treasured historic places from
unnecessary demolition because once they're gone, they cannot be rebuilt. Please don't be on the wrong side of history. Instead, cast your vote to preserve it because this place matters. Thank you for your time.
>> Thank you, Steve G. Steve Gity, Lana Gellzer, Cindy Parker. Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners and staff. Thank you so much for your time today. I am Steve Gity with Highwoods Properties at 2011 East Pine Street, uh,
located in downtown Highwoods. The company I work for, owns about 1.7 million square feet of class A office buildings. We've been growing with the city, beautiful, for the past 27 years. We love downtown for sure. It's what we call best business district. It's very,
very walkable. Our office buildings are about 88% leased and our customers continue to remind us that they would love to continue to walk downtown and see and enjoy beautiful things on Church and Orange Avenue, but unfortunately there's no place for them to dine or
enjoy. These buildings are beautiful for sure, but they need to be loved and not neglected. I'm in favor for this proposal. It brings current, vacant, and underutilized properties back to life. This temporary approach, a very
thoughtful way of balancing preservation and revitalization. It reduces the building decay while enhancing and highlighting the building's character for all of us to enjoy. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Lana Gellzer, Cindy Parker,
Justin Core. Lana Gills at 815 Hill Street, Orlando. What will they say about your footprint? And the question was posed to us um two weeks ago, why now? And my answer, my response was because you can do it. So
I'm speaking on moratoriums and they should not do harm. Remember everybody this is what's happened. Tinkerfield national protected gone. The wetlands national protected gone.
The paramore community had a moratorum. No more homeless shelters or social services programs in that 1.4 square mile radius. Every time this council wants to do anything in that they resend the moratorum.
So I'm questioning you your ability. Will you do the right thing? If you resend this and your past history has indicated you will continue to do what you've always done. Make sure the special interest groups get what they
want. You have a lot of things in place to protect our community, but you look the other way. I remember so many years ago, the council voted to to tear down the McCory department store. They voted that day
and that night it was gone. All of these things have been happening because we have things in place to protect the community. But for some apparent reason, what would they say about your footprint? what would they say about you? And what they're saying is you do
not honor what the community is saying. And when you need something to change, you just change it. And then you'll put it back and say it's for the good of the community. I'm watching you on Bob Carr cuz it's in Creative Village and it's a
national protected building. However, I know if we go to sleep, it might go to get torn down. Only because of your history of what you've done in the past is what we're questioning. Especially Lana Gellzer.
Last time I questioned the staff ability to see what was going on and I called them incompetent or they just didn't know what they were doing. The Hington Post was came down and did a story and we proved exactly what we were saying was true. So all I'm saying is
you can say what you want to do, but your action speaks louder than words. And your action says you're going to continue to do this. That's why another 37 story building is getting ready to go up by a church. Come on, guys. Why so quickly? Why now?
Because you can do it. But is is it fair to everybody in the city of Orlando? Is it fair to us? Judge, I'm judging you on what you've done in the past and what you have done has done harm. Moratoriums should not do harm. Thank you.
[applause] >> Cindy Parker, Justin Core, Richard Kilby. >> Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. My name is Cindy Parker. I live at 309 Cherokee Drive in the Cherokee Historic District. My husband, David, and I have lived there since 1983.
So, we have been 43 years living in a historic district. I've served previously as uh on the historic preservation board. I served as chairman of the historic preservation board. And the last time I appeared in city council
before this body was on behalf of the historic preservation board when I was chairman in 2003 and there was the public hearing to grant the demolition permit to what was then called the Jmont block and that's where the plaza building is now. As the previous speaker
said within hours of that demolition permit being issued, demolition began on those historic buildings. And within just a few days, the Orlando Sentinel had a front page picture of the developer of the plaza project standing
in front of a pile of rubble with his arms raised in the victory position. And when I hear of this moratorum, that's all I see is that pile of rubble and a developer in the victory position.
Please don't do that to our downtown. The previous speakers have been eloquent including the staff and citizens, but I've heard one of the speakers said they this proposal was for a block byb block takedown.
He didn't mean to say what I heard him say, but a block byb block takedown means demo demo demo demo. And you talk about using the highest and best use, the highest in density, highest density zoning in these adaptive
reuses. Well, you can't do that without a demo. So, I urge you, please put on the brakes, consider other ways to solve the downtown problem, and please oppose this moratorum. Thank you. >> Thank you, Justin Core, Richard Kilby,
Megan Core. Council Justin Core 236 South Lucern. Um I own an old house. I own an old building. Um I have done the old building rehab. It is expensive. It is costly. And although I have done that, I am not a hardcore
preservationist. So I'm not here to speak from that perspective. I want to speak to this primarily as policy. And I think on its face, it is bad policy for quite a few reasons. But first, let's just be honest. I think the city's perspective here and the CR CRA's
perspective here is primarily to increase the tax base. That's not a bad thing, but I think it flies in the face of what a lot of the residents are asking for. It flies directly against that. If it was purely about activating Church Street, we could incentivize the
current owners to activate Church Street. That is doable. We've sat on our hands here for way too long without activating Church Street. Five, six years, we've let this thing just deteriorate. We've let the buildings deteriorate and last two weeks ago I spoke about developer induced blight. I believe that even more so now that we
have allowed many of these properties to become blighted for this purpose for today. Um, so I think also this policy creates a perverse incentive because there's a lot of owners, Nuniato was one, um, us, I mean there's
a lot of property owners who have spent money downtown, who have continued to spend money downtown, who have tenants in their buildings, who have invested in their buildings. And for many of them, they actually won't have enough time to take advantage of this 36-month period. So on its face, I think if it's good policy and you believe it is good policy
for Church Street and downtown, why the 36-month period? I think that makes no sense because at the end of it, if we demo, demo, demo, as Cindy said, what do we have to preserve? There'll be nothing left to preserve. So I think we got to
really reconsider this policy as it is written. And either we believe in it thoroughly and we might as well do away with all historic preservation or we bring project by project before the city and then council can overrule the board time and time again. It's very possible.
I see you shaking your head and I know this has happened that because they haven't been brought before the board. So it hasn't even had a chance to go through the proper protocols of resident boards that are in place for this p for this purpose. After demolition there is no reversability. I mean, we cannot take
the 36 month, we pull this back at 36 months, it is irreversible. So, um I really think it's important to remember that we just cannot undemolish a landmark. Once that happens, it is over. We need a better way of going about this. Um I heard David speak about um
the immense amount of research and I agree there was a lot of research being done. None of it spoke to the historic uh buildings being in the way of vi revitalizing downtown. Um we want these buildings to be activated. We
should activate them. And if we want if the goal is adaptive reuse, then we need to change the way this ordinance is written in the first place. Thank you. >> Thank you. Richard Kilby, [applause] Megan Core, Joy Dickinson.
>> Hello. Uh, my name is Rick Kilby. I live at 1818 Curry Ford Road, about two miles from here. I'm a history guy and I'm going to stay in my lane, talk a little bit about a learn history. Last July, I gave a talk at the history center called Ray from Railroads to Rosies, the evolution of the church street block. In
preparing for that talk, I was reminded that the story of Orlando is written in its historic buildings. If we lose those buildings, we do not just lose brick and mortars. We lose the people, the struggles, and the dreams that built this city. We lose part of Orlando's
soul. Joseph Bumby arrived here in 1873, paying $10 from an ox cart ride to what was then a frontier settlement. While waiting for his citrus groves to mature, he male he carried the US mail on horseback between Orlando and Sanford.
When the railroad arrived in 1880, Bombi's warehouse became Orlando's very first railroad depot and he became the city's first ticket agent. In 1886, he built a hardware store across from the station that still exists today. That building anchored the Bumby Block on
Church Street for 80 years. William Slimmens came to Orlando in 1886 and opened a dry good store on Church Street. During the 1920s boom, he built the tan brick Slimmens building. His family served Orlando there for decades. In 1973, Bob Snow gave it new life as
Rosio Grady's Good Time Emporium and helped spark a downtown revival. In 1911, JA Collier, a successful black tor built a two-story commercial building at 27 West Church Street. It housed a bakery, a dry goods store, a drugstore,
and Collier's tailor shop. At that time, he was the only black land owner in downtown Orlando. His building is not just part of black history. It's part of Orlando's very important history. The Slemens Building, the Bumby Building, and the Nicholson Collier Building are
not obstacles to progress. They are landmarks that are the physical record of who we are. It took 150 years for Orlando to gain the patina of history that makes the city beautiful more than just another place on a map. So why
would we put that at risk with a rushed ill-conceived moratorum? Once these buildings are gone, they are gone forever. No vote and no redevelopment plan will bring them back. We owe the people who built this city and the generations that follow better than
that. Thank you. >> Megan Coy Core, Joy Dickinson, Brian Wilson. >> Good afternoon, council. Megan Core 236 South Lucern Circle East. First, I want to thank each of you who took the time
this week to speak with concerned citizens about this moratorum. Regardless of today's outcome, I sincerely appreciate your willingness to listen and investigate this issue with what little time we had. We all share the same vision for downtown. We want a
vibrant city with restaurants, shops, and activity day and night. I live nearby and regularly walk to the Dr. Philip Center events like the front yard holiday festival showcase what downtown can be, but we also see and experience the same blight that you do. And it's
not only in the downtown historic district. So, I think it's unfair to blame it on that alone. I've followed DTO 2.0 closely and have been excited by its promise. Yet, some proposals have left me wondering who they were designed for. specifically projects like the
pocket parks and lake lousern which seem to reflect a larger pattern of ignoring citizen needs and concerns in favor of paying consultants and developers to tell us what we want. We've seen this play out before with the plaza and 55 West. Now we're going to do the same
thing again and hope for different results. There's a saying about that, but I won't repeat it here. With high interest rates and construction costs, what happens if historic buildings are demolished and redevelopment stalls? Another vacant lot for years like we've seen with the Orchid Ballroom.
Preservation isn't an obstacle. It's a proven investment through existing incentives and tax credits. I also want to clear up some misconceptions I've heard from council and staff about the Historic Preservation Board. The board is not an anti-development body. It's
simply citizen oversight. In the last five years, the board has approved every proposal from the downtown historic district. We have approved modifications that improve street activation, converting windows into doors, and adding a balcony on Wall Street where none previously existed. To
my knowledge, only two proposals for projects on Church Street have been submitted since many of those buildings changed hands in 2021. One was approved and one was withdrawn before coming to the board. It's difficult to argue the process doesn't work when few have tried it. The historic preservation officer,
who's an architect with a masters in historic preservation, does use the secretary of interior standards when working with applicants, but those recommendations can be refused and projects can still go before the board. The board, while considering those standards, is not required to follow
them. We can and have granted exceptions in the interest of adaptive reuse and responsible development. Emphasis on responsible. The HPB also has no authority over interior renovations like ADA improvements as long as they don't affect the exterior facade. Growth and
preservation are not competing values. If we lose our historic fabric in pursuit of the next big project, we lose the very character that makes downtown worth investing in it all. I respectfully ask that you listen to the citizens for once and vote no on this moratorium. >> Thank you. Joy Dickinson, Brian Wilson,
Val Mobley. >> Hi everyone. Uh, my name is Joy Wallace Dickinson and I live at 614 East Washington Street. I'm an Orlando historian, writer, and longtime advocate for preserving our community's history. And I'm struck today by how much everybody here basically wants the same
thing. We just disagree on how to get there, I think. And also some of us want to be included rather than told to move aside. But I'm here today especially to highlight a letter that was sent to you all by Melissa Wy, CEO of the Florida Trust for Historic Preservation, which
is the statewide nonprofit group that advocates for Florida's historic resources. The trust strongly opposes suspending historic preservation protections in downtown Orlando. Its letter reminds us that the Downtown Historic District, established in 1980,
was one of Florida's earliest local historic districts, and there are many others. Orlando's preservation program began 50 years ago in 1976, our nation's bicesentennial. And for decades, the city has recognized that preservation
and responsible growth can and should advance together. The proposed ordinance would set aside that carefully developed system for three years. During that time, some of downtown's landmark buildings could be demolished without the normal review or an opportunity to
discuss alternatives and mitigation. This is not a minor procedural adjustment. It's a major change with potentially irreversible consequences. As many speakers have pointed out, Sunday's Orlando Sentinel editorial
asked questions that deserve answers. What evidence shows that the historic preservation board has prevented need needed de redevelopment? What obstacle is so serious that the entire system must be suspended? And why must a decision of this magnitude be made so
very quickly? Historic preservation does not mean freezing downtown in time. Buildings can be adapted, expanded, and given new uses. That's our hope. The preservation process exists to just manage that change thoughtfully, not
prevent it. Before the city removes these protections, those who understand historic buildings, planning, development, and downtown neighborhood should have a seat at the table. I urge you to consider pausing this ordinance and establish a genuinely public deliberative review involving all
interested parties, including the historic preservation board and Orlando's preservation community and architects. Orlando can pursue an energetic and prosperous downtown without discarding the safeguards that protect what makes it so very special. I
know you'll proceed responsibly and in good faith. Thanks so much. >> Thank you, Brian Wilson. Val Moy Raymond Cox. >> Good afternoon, Mayor, council members. My name is Brian Wilson. I live at 507 Palmer Street as well as downtown at 1
South Orange Sweet 200. U you know, as as many people have said today, it's an interesting situation where everybody wants the best for downtown Orlando. And when I think of downtown Orlando, I think of the historic district. My building is at the corner of Maine and Maine, which is
Orange and Central is one of the oldest buildings in Orlando. And my partners and I purchased it seven years ago and set about doing exactly what everyone here is encouraging people to do, the adaptive reuse of a delinquent, underutilized building for the modern use.
It was a nightmare. People often ask me, would I do it again? I would not. There's no way the money we spent to make this building reactivated uh will return its investment. And I think that's the reality that we're confronted with today in a world of
rising costs. If you to understand the process of taking one of these old buildings and making it for modern use is a matter of satisfying the building department, the fire marshal, potential tenants as well as the historic preservation board. the fire marshall and the building
department have very objective realities of what you're allowed to do. My experience trying to navigate that while navigating the historic uh preservation board was one of subjective opinions about what was desired. Often that flew in the face of what the fire marshall or
building department was telling me was possible. The net result is I was forced to do things that and let me take a step back. I'm a history major. I live in an old house. I own an old building. I'm passionate about old buildings, but they do need to change to be useful
in 2026 and beyond. Some of the changes I requested, I was denied for with comments such as, "Well, we just don't like the way that looks," or, "Why don't you make this two feet bigger or two feet higher?" Well, in the real world, what that resulted in, and
in my experience, it's removing a failing awning and trying to activate the corner with light and glass to make it a vibrant corner. And every step of the way, I was fought on that process. It resulted in my
partners and I spending probably in excess of a million dollars to deliver the awning that is there today, which is beautiful. My building is beautiful. I'm thrilled with the way it turned out. But it was unnecessary to reactivate that corner. It would have been more vibrant. It still would have been
respectful of the historic characters of the building, but maybe slightly the different than everybody's vision for it. And that's where this moratorum comes into effect is that if you want money invested, you need to be able to
have a series of objective realities that people know going in of what's going to be allowed, not allowed, so they can see if it's worth doing. As a as a building owner, at the end of the day, that's what's going to determine and that's why I'm in favor of this moratorum. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Val Moy, Raymond Cox, Tana Porter. >> [clears throat] >> Now, see, you've already started a clock. I haven't even said anything yet. And I'm supposed to be able to say my name and address before you start my
time. Val Mobly 226 West King Street. Okay. I'm hearing that we need to enjoy the core of our city. We need more activity downtown. That's agreed. But who wants to come down here? There's no shopping. There's no retail stores. Very
few restaurants. They've left. I don't really know why, but very few restaurants. People do come to the Dr. Phillips Center and then they go home. They do come downtown to walk over to the Kia Center and then they go home
because there's nothing to do down here unless you want to go to a bar. Then that's that's a whole different story. Um, okay. So, I read the ordinance, okay, and it uses the word demolition
six times. So, I keep hearing that demolition is not on the table, but yet here it is. Okay, let's talk about um let's talk about Wait a minute. Uh supporting uh new residents can support
local business and revitalize our urban core. Well, why do they want to live down here if there's nothing for them to do? They have to get in their car and drive to shop and they have, you know, I guess Uber brings them their food. Um,
there is significant residential development throughout downtown that have brought jobs and businesses. Well, the businesses are all offices. They're not things that they can do downtown. um we have seen uh comparatively little
redevelopment in the overlay district. Well, you know I so the moratorium is not intended to eliminate historic preservation yet that's exactly what is going to happen. Um the proposed approach
includes new incentives to encourage investment in historic buildings. Okay. Adaptive reuse. I've heard that more times where I don't know where he is. I've heard that too many times and that's what we all want, adaptive reuse.
And I'm sorry that last gentleman had such a hard time with permits and the fire department and all those other things. I understand that that those things are difficult, but that doesn't mean that it's not worth doing. Um, we
need to adapt these buildings to uses that will bring people downtown who want to come downtown, who want to have something to do downtown. So, I think DTO should spend more time on trying to attract those kind of businesses, not
just offices, but shopping, restaurants, and bring people downtown. Raymond Cox, Tana Porter, Jeffrey Thompson. >> Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. My name is Raymond Cox. I'm president of Orange Preservation Trust. Address, PO
Box 1624, Orlando, Florida 32803. Since the recent announcement of the proposed moratorium in the downtown historic district, a lot of information has been forthcoming. What we hear from staff are examples how they feel the historic districts is impeding development. On the other hand, counter
information is now forthcoming from subject matter experts, professionals from associated disciplines and the public via media interviews, social media, public records, and meetings such as this on how it's not this historic districting that's slowing development.
The result has created the conflict we have here. It's understandable that the Economic Development Agency and the Downtown Development Board do all they can do to promote what's best for the growth of Orlando and that the Historic Preservation Office acts in a responsible manner that protects the
historic integrity and economic incentives for the city's cultural resources is charged by the city's growth management plan and the Florida Department of Historical Resources. Both goals are essential for the economic health of the city. They're not a mut
they are not mutually exclusive. >> [clears throat] >> As the ordinance is written, section 8, the effective date is upon adoption. To clarify that, I called this morning and spoke with the Florida coordinator of the C certified local government agency in Tallahassee. A summary of the
review from his office is that the ordinance is written removing the HP review component is in violation of the certified local government guidelines which will start the desertification process. This will result in the termination of any current approved funding that's in
the tunnel to come out as well as any future eligible funding for any preservation projects. This is not only the 66 structures in the downtown historic district. It's all historic districts that come under the city's
growth management plan. So that's residential as well as the 47 landmarks. So, we're talking 1,800 properties in addition to the six uh the 47 landmark properties that can lose funding. You've all spoke this earlier today about how
much grants and funding you've been getting. This is money that will be lost. So, what do we do? Do is it fair to economically penalize the many for the few in the downtown historic district? Now, Mayor Dyer in the past has asked
conflicting parties to sit down together and discuss their needs and suggest their solutions. Case in point, my neighborhood with the St. James Church. It was it was a perfect suggestion by the mayor. It's it was logical, rational, productive, and in this situation, there's a lot of
miscommunication concerning the ordinance for the uh the uh downtown historic district. I'm asking the mayor and the city council to defer this agenda item, direct the stakeholders being all affected parties, the internal city agencies, property owners, and the
public to convene and honestly discuss the needs and solutions to come up with compro compromise resolution. Thank you. >> Thank you, Ton. Tanya Porter, Jeffrey Thompson, Scott Sidler. Um, I'm Tana Porter, PhD, 4304,
Edgewater Drive, Orlando 32804. >> Miss Porter, could you pull that mic closer to you, please? >> And I'm a teacher, writer, historian, and for 11 years research librarian at the history center. So, I know a little bit about the city's history. Um, and I want to say today to the mayor
and commissioners, Orlando is a Florida certified local government, which as an incentive makes money available exclusively for owners of property and historic districts. From 1984 to the 2027 grant periods, 25 grants totaling,
$7.4 million have been awarded in Orlando. Some notable recipients include the Carowak House, St. Luke's Cathedral Church, Black Bottom House of Prayer, Maxi Krum's House, Plaza Live, William Wells House, Lou House to name a few.
Private residences and businesses have been recipient of state grants as well. Regardless of your opinion on the proposed moratorum, it is critical to point out that the process here today violates the city's agreement with the state with regards to the certified
local government accredititation. The compliance failure to notify the state for a 30-day review of proposed changes of the ordinance will result in the CLG's descertification. This would create a financial incentive
loss to historic property owners in all of the city's historic districts as well as landmarks since property owners and the city of Orlando will no longer be eligible for these grants. If your goal is to move forward with the moratorum in
the downtown historic district, I urge you to defer this item today so that you can be in compliance with all regulatory procedures. Please do not jeopardize these economic incentives for not only the downtown historic district, but all of Orlando's historic landmarks and
other historic districts. Thank you. Thank you. Jeffrey Thompson, Scott Cidler, Ryan Young. [clears throat] >> Good afternoon. My name Can you hear me? I don't know if I can raise it. Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Thompson and I live at 600 East Amelia Street in the
Lake Yale Heights Historic District. I spoke here at the last meeting, but I'm not sure I made much of an impression. So, I'm back here to again to express my concerns about the new ordinance. If you remember, I'm the guy who's been on the historic preservation board for 18 of the past 40 years. But today, I'm
speaking on my own behalf. First, I want to say there is nothing in the historic standards that prohibits adaptive reuse. Period. And to quote the historic standards, contemporary design for alterations and additions to
existing properties shall not be discouraged. Demolition is forever. Regardless if the ordinance only lasts three years, whatever is lost because of the ordinance will be gone forever. So, it's small consolation to say the ordinance is only temporary. Passing this
ordinance will also encourage those who have perhaps never considered demolition to rush and get a building permit to tear down their buildings. And perhaps the lot will sit vacant and landbanked until a better opportunity comes along. If I was less naive, I might even think that's what's happening on the south side of Church Street. First, the Orchid
Ballroom, which is part of Church Street Station, was demolished three years ago, but due to quote unquote financial changes, the building permit has not been acted on, and the lot has been allowed to sit vacant ever since. Now that that same owner controls the rest of the block on the south side of Church
Street from Cheyenne Saloon to the Bumby Hardware, after making it difficult for tenants like Hamburger Marys to stay, which left two years ago, the developer seems to be creating blight by neglect, a term I heard earlier today. In an effort to force the city's hand into an
ordinance like this moratorum, they will reap the benefits of the change in land use by tearing down the historic buildings, combining parcels, and building a new tower that could be as harmful to downtown as existing plaza. This is the oldest trick in the developer playbook. Buy property whose
value is lower due to zoning, cry unfair, get the zoning changed, the zoning changes, and their investment just increased 10fold. All but five properties in the historic district have been purchased since the district was created. So, they all knew better. Please do not reward this kind of greed
or let it destroy our shared architectural heritage. Owning multip multiple parcels is not a bad thing. That's what Bob Snow did, but he did that to celebrate Orlando's history. These current developers won't care about Orlando's architectural heritage when they tear it down. Developers claim
the process is slow, but again, I'll refer to the plaza. The developer who went who went bankrupt resulting in the foreclosure of the property did not like the HP recommendations to save the to save just the facades. The city council overrode the HP decision and by midnight the same day the bulldozers moved in the
buildings were gone. That's about as fast as a process as I've ever seen. I understand the city has concerns about vacancies, but that's the case for all of downtown. So don't make historic preservation the scapegoat. I urge this council to defeat this moratorum. It will be counterproductive to what we
want downtown to be and diminish the sense of place and diversity of our built environments. These are the things that will attract visitors as downtown rises to meet the future. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. [applause] >> Scott Sidler, Ryan Young, Deborah Smith.
[clears throat] >> Good afternoon. I'm Scott Sidler, 635 Delaney A, Orlando 32801. I'm a restoration contractor and a former chair of the city's historic preservation board. And I'm here to ask you to please vote no on this ordinance. And here's why. The city says this
moratorum is temporary. Three years just to study the effects. But here's the problem with that. The moratorum is temporary, but the changes will be forever. This ordinance will leave permanent scars on our city that you can't vote away in 3 years. You cannot undemolish a building. Once a wrecking
ball swings downtown, no future council can ever vote that building back into existence. And the ARB has no historic preservation bonafides and is not the appropriate board to review these historic buildings. You're removing protections from some of your most treasured pieces of history to study
what happens. That's like leaving the hen house open to investigate whether the fox will come. And here's the second cost that nobody's talking about. Historic status is what unlocks the federal historic tax credit and state level grants. That's federal money that never touches the city's budget used to
rehab these very buildings. And Orlando barely uses it. Since 2001, developers in our city have captured just 37 million of that federal investment for historic buildings. Tampa pulled in 150 million. Jacksonville 170 million. Miami more than 600 million for historic
buildings. We are dead last among Florida's major cities. So, it's no wonder there is less development in our historic core here. This ordinance would push us further behind. On top of that, we're a CLG, a certified local government, a federal designation that we've talked about here, and it depends on us actually enforcing our
preservation ordinance. Passing this ordinance as written puts that status at risk. The state was concerned enough when they saw this ordinance to write to the city last week saying as much. Please don't discount their opinion. And please, commissioners, think about the timing. As Tallahassee fights over
slashing property taxes, this council wants to choke off one of the few funding tools that doesn't cost the city a dime. That's incredibly backwards. If investment really is the goal, I have a question then. You're offering a tax abatement in this ordinance to spur development. Good. Offer it. But why
bundle it with get gutting the historic district? Give owners the carrot without stripping the protections. Nothing stops you from doing both. The truth is there are too many unanswered questions here. questions that the public deserves to weigh in on. The ordinance got zero public feedback before it was drafted in
the dark of the night and rushed to a vote in 5 days built to keep the public out of this room. Please don't reward that process. Vote no and tell city staff to do this in the open. And one last thing, you'll notice that there are a lot of older Orlando speaking out
against this. I believe that's because these people better understand the importance of this town's history than anyone. I urge you to listen to their wisdom. Thank you. >> [applause] >> Ryan Young, Deborah Smith, Betsy Owens,
[clears throat] Mayor, Commissioners, good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me a few minutes to talk today. Ryan Young, 8:14 West Church Street. I'm an architect, a general contractor, and an infill developer, and have
firsthand knowledge of the HPB process. My comments today are not a referendum on the past performance of the historic preservation board. I appreciate the board's service and all of the members that I have personally worked with in the past.
However, I would like to offer another perspective of how we can embrace this three-year moratorum as an opportunity to test new ideas. New ideas that allow for the redevelopment of buildings that have sat vacant for years. I started my career across the street in the Sunrust
building on the 18th floor. And I clearly remember walking down the street and being able to go to TGI Fridays, Jungle Gyms, Ceviche for lunch, shopping on Church Street Exchange, and we even had Sharper Image retail at the time,
all within a city block as downtown should be. Those may not be the tenants that we want today, but it did point to a thriving and active downtown. Perhaps this proposal offers a new and better way forward to allow progress to move at
the speed conducive with the redevelopment we so desperately need downtown. It's my belief that our current processes generally need an overhaul. And this is a step in the right direction. Just because the code and the
process has been written for years doesn't mean it's the correct way forward and it meets the needs of a developing and burgeoning city that we have today. To be clear, I am for maintaining our history with a few the few historical buildings that we do
have. I am confident this can be accomplished through our ARB process as proposed. I'm supportive of this initiative with the hopes that our downtown can thrive as I know it can. So, please support this proposal. We cannot continue to afford to do more of
the same. Thank you. >> Thank you, Deborah Smith, Betsy Owens, Tim Hayes. Good afternoon. My name is Deborah Smith. I live at 830 Palm Drive, Orlando 32803.
On June 8th, I attended the first reading to amend the ordinance, which requires the Historic Preservation Board to review development plans within the historic district. I'm asking you to pause this vote,
do more homework, reach out to the community, and I want to explain why. The rush to amend this ordinance raises serious concerns. The historic preservation board is being cut out of the conversation.
I have no idea why that happened. Commissioners and the public were given very little notice. public's upset. Commissioner should be upset. And the staff presentation was thin on details relating to how any of this is
the historic building's fault. Um, I also found it misleading. I had a lot of questions and many commissioners didn't ask one question. Before moving forward, this commission should wait until the two-way street
conversions are complete. Let's give that a try. See what happens. Good idea. Additional street parking should be added. And a study that involves
all those involved in downtown should take place, be conducted, and shared with the public. At the June 8th meeting, a commissioner, he's not here, speaking in defense of the moratorum said, "I don't hear anyone saying
they're going to tear down any historic buildings." I attended that entire meeting. I did not hear a single person say they would not tear down our historic buildings either.
With so little information being shared, what are we to believe? I don't know. I also noticed on June 8th meeting that several commissioners who spoke offered little more than talking points in support of the moratorum
and others asked no questions and made no public comments and then voted yes. I don't know why how that happens. How is that possible? [sighs] I don't get it. Um, so I don't think that's leadership at
all. So blaming the historic preservation board and our historic buildings are not the obstacle. The lack of vision and transparency in this process is. Thank you. >> Betsy Owens, Tim Hayes, Tom Price.
>> Good afternoon, Mayor Dyer and commissioners. My name is Betsy Owens and I live at 3029 Westchester Avenue on the Orlando side of Orwin Manor. I'm here today as both an Orlando resident and as a historic preservation professional. I serve as the executive
director of Kasifale's Historic Home Museum in Winter Park, where a major part of our mission is advocating for the preservation of that city's historic and architectural assets. In Winter Park, we have often pointed to Orlando as a model to emulate a city with six
local historic districts, seven national registered districts, and nearly 50 years of preservation leadership. In fact, this very week, we invited Orlando's historic preservation officer to speak to 80 community leaders in Winter Park about Orlando's historic
preservation successes, hoping the city's example will inspire stronger efforts in our own community. So, I'm dismayed both as a preservationist and as an Orlando resident to see this moratorum being considered. I absolutely
understand the need to revitalize downtown. I worked downtown in Orlando from 2016 to 2014 and I saw firsthand the de deterioration of the downtown experience. I believe downtown's future is the most important issue facing this
city. But it's simply not credible to suggest that historic preservation is the cause of downtown's lack of investment. Something about this doesn't pass the sniff test. I hope I'm wrong. Historic assets met with vision and
investment are what give a place a sense of authenticity. They are what make a district memorable rather than generic. They are what attract people. It is why people are drawn to places like Ottabon Park and Mills 50. Neighborhoods with
texture, a cool retro vibe, a sense of place. It is why every day mirrors buses pe pick people up at the attractions and convention center and go down I4 past downtown Orlando and are dumped out onto
the National Register District of Park Avenue in Winter Park because people are seeking history, authenticity, and charm. They are assets to be protected, adapted, marketed, and invested in. Downtown Orlando needs investment. It
needs energy. It needs strategy, but weakening protections for the very buildings that make downtown distinctive is not a revitalization plan. It's a step backward. The communities that thrive are not the ones that discard their historic fabric when redevelopment
becomes difficult. They are the ones that use vision to put those make those assets part of the solution. Thank you. [applause] Tim Hayes, Tom Price, Diane Martins. How's it going, Tim Hayes, 7-Eleven East Ridgewood
Street. Before I get started, let's acknowledge these people behind us that are on camera the entire time. I sat there last meeting. Horrible mistake. You're going to be on every Instagram reel. Hopefully, head nods while I'm talking. Mr. Mr. Unsler, you learned the
lesson last time, too. I am the vice president of the Lake Eola Heights Historic District, and we encompass just over a thousand homes, businesses, and apartments within our boundaries. The Lake Eyola Heights Historic Neighborhood Association strongly
opposes the proposed moratorum on the downtown historic district and this ordinance. As a neighboring historic district, we oppose re removing critical protections for our historic resources, even those framed as temporary. Removing
the protections that help preserve our shared history for current and future residents should result or could result in irres irres stroke irreversible damage. [laughter] It is true I did have one. Lake Yola Heights is difficult is
directly impacted by the current blight vacancies and underdevelopment within the central the city's central business district. We agree that the city must take meaningful steps to attract new businesses and support downtown revitalization. However, we do not agree
this moratorum is the solution. Many ground level properties located downtown, include those located outside the downtown historic preservation overlay district, remain vacant. Many ground level spaces in brand new de downtown developments are also empty.
This suggests that historic preservation requirements are not the driving cause of the underutilization affecting our central business district. The speed with which this ordinance has moved through the process is also deeply concerning. Public notice was issued on June 3rd with the first vote on June
8th. The limited time for public review, input, and meaningful discussion on a moratorum with lasting consequences has raised concerns among our neighbors. There is a growing perception that plans may already be in motion, potentially framed as necessary for development, but
likely to put historic resources at risk without truly addressing the underlying challenges facing downtown. We urge the city to open this topic for broader public discussion and include neighboring historic districts, downtown business owners, developers, city staff,
preservation advocates, and leaders from other cities that have successfully revitalized historic spaces. Together, we can find a place for a path forward that honors our past while contributing to a stronger future of downtown or Orlando. Signed, the Lake Eola Heights
Historic Neighborhood Association. Thank you. Thank you. [applause] Tom Price, Diane Martins, David Martins, Mayor Dar, Commissioners, Tom Price, Architect, 554 Lake Avenue, Orlando.
[snorts] I was among those fortunate few, I think, the seven members that Mayor Carl Langford invited to join the preservation board as founding members 50 years ago today, 1976,
seems like just last week practically. Um, our charge was to identify, define, document, and figure out how to protect these these ancestors.
All of which all these buildings have been here now today at least 100 years, some of them 140 years. There's no one here who's been here that long. So, we need to respect them and we need to
protect them. However, one of the disadvantages of going near the last here is that all the good lines have been used. So, one of the advantages of going is that I can try to synthesize everyone
here is for the same reason. We all support downtown. We all love downtown. We have all worked in downtown. We want to see it thrive. I want to see it thrive. As an architect, I enjoy new buildings as much as I do
old buildings. And I enjoy and understand that if given the chance, the developers coming before the board, before the city of Orlando can be inspired by old buildings, if they ask their architects and task their
architects to come up with new concepts, exciting concepts, we can stay on the map in this genre. The only problem I see here is that the the developers feel and maybe rightfully
so that the sequence is out of order that historic preservation gets the wor the first word which often they think is the last word. My recommendation please is to figure out we have a lot of
intelligence in this room. Probably half of Orlando's intelligence is here in this room. [laughter] figure out how to make this work for everybody. That's your charge. Without losing historic monuments, without losing new development, it can be done.
Believe me, I have confidence in today's young architects and some of the old ones even. We still kick around and we do old buildings. I can do an old building that I mean a new building that looks like an old building. That's not what we're doing right here. So please
pause this moratorum give yourself enough time to study the issue and come up with a per perfect sequence of review. Don't take chairs away from the table bring chairs to the table. Thank you. >> Thank you. Hey, [applause]
>> Diane Martins, David Martins, Paul Scssky. >> Uh, good afternoon. My name is Diane Martins. I'm at 229 East Amelia Street, Orlando, Florida, 32801. And I live in Lake Heights Historic District. And
today I'd like to discuss something that I want you guys to really think about. Uh I'd like to discuss one of our prized gems in downtown Orlando and that's the Church Streets Train Station. The original structure was a modest wooden building constructed by the South
Florida Railroad. This facility facilitated the transportation of local citrus farmers produce from Orlando to Sanford, ultimately reaching the St. John's River by a steamship. The railroad and citrus industry played a pivotal role in establishing Orlando's
prominence on the map. As the citrus boom and subsequent population growth in Orlando necessitated the accommodation of the influx of citrus and passengers, the original structure was replaced with our magnificent Victorian romanesque revival architecture. A style emphasized
by permanence and historical grandeur. The three-story tower served as a distinctive feature of Victorian public transit buildings and that is our Church Street station. However, as Orlando continued to expand, the train station became overwhelmed by traffic.
Consequently, the Atlantic Coastline Railway officially relocated its main passenger operations to a new location further south, which is now the 1926 built Slate Boulevard station, which is now serving as our Amtrak station. The
depot was repurposed as a freight and ticket office. Notably, instead of demolishing this beautiful Victorian building, they opted to construct a new station a mile or so away to accommodate passengers, demonstrating their recognition of the invaluable historic
sign significance of this structure. Even then, by the mid 1980s, the depot was designated as a national historic landmark. In 1972, Bob Snow acquired the depot and surrounding buildings, transforming into
the successful Church Street station. However, the influx of Disney's Pleasure Island and Universal Seawalk drew crowds away from the area, leading to its decline. Today, the depot stands as a focal point for Sunreil passengers. Given its enduring presence and acceptance as a downtown historic
landmark, the depot deserves to remain untouched by developers who fail to comprehend the profound significance of history and historical structures. Let us remember our origins and recognize the importance of history to downtown Orlando. This ordinance threatens this
and other historic resources. Resources best left in the hands of experts, the Historic Preservation Board. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. [applause] David Martins, Paul Stompsky, Rachel Williams, Commissioners, Mayor Dyer,
[clears throat] I have a long history of working with the city of Orlando on significant projects. I'm not going to go through my qualifications, but I would like to talk about World Cup soccer 1994, which brought the world to
Orlando in a groundbreaking way. As an member of the executive committee, we collaborated closely with city officials throughout the rigorous selection process. Once Orlando was chosen, we faced numerous requirements to fulfill
for FIFA. the organizing body of World Cup soccer. This endeavor spanned at least two years working closely with the city of Orlando. This type of coordination works
and would include a citizen advisory board to effectively manage this major effort to transform downtown. We must work alongside the city, the developers, the retailers, small businesses, and other stakeholders who will be involved
in downtown's future. This planning council would collaborate with the current city boards, including the historic preservation board, to reshape the future of downtown. The current approach of solely listening to
advisors to developers, it's insufficient and sidesteps a citizen involvement that's vital to a successful downtown. Another big reason um big [clears throat] reason
this ordinance doesn't work for Orlando. Our neighborhood association in Lake Yola Heights succinctly articulated our concerns in a letter addressed to all commissioners and to the mayor. In the last paragraph, they stated, "We urge the city to open this topic for
broader public discussion and include neighboring historic districts, downtown business owners, developers, city staff, preservation advocates, and leaders from other cities that have successfully revitalized their historic spaces.
Together, we can find a path forward that honors our past while contributing to a stronger future for downtown Orlando. Thank you. >> Thank you, [clears throat] Paul Sconski, Rachel Williams,
Jerry Mthaney, Mayor Commissioners, Paul Scssky, uh 1400 East Ridgewood Street in Orlando. Um private equity versus government versus historic preservation.
Um, that discussion isn't specific to this room. Uh, I'm in support of the initiative, but with a giant asterisk. On February 4th of this year, I had conversations with Chris Fowler and Jack Williams with the National Registry of Historic Places in Tallahassee regarding
a certain matter downtown. At the end of that discussion, I asked for any last suggestions. The response was that they prefer familiarity over accuracy. With that direction as a guide, I would strongly advise developers and government to keep the facades of the
buildings on Church Street. Except for the Cheyenne Saloon, which is savable but can't financially exist alone. The buildings have been stripped and headed to the same fate as former Woolwors and McCur buildings. Old favorites hiding a giant rat civilization inside of a fire
trap. My solution, keep the facades, but sacrif sacrifice the antiquated buildings. This is doable as Mr. Fowler and Williams suggested. Take familiarity over accuracy. Build beautiful, functional new buildings behind the facades, but do not lose the spirit of
the identity of what Bob Snow built. Bob was a close friend of mine. I would suggest you keep the walkover bridge. He he had told me that he designed it to look like a railroad car. And he did. if you look at it the next time you see it. My solution is have set designers
fabricate two uh pairs of ultra realistic looking fiberglass train wheels and attach them to each side of the bottom of the train car. Call it the Bob Snow line. In fact, call the whole block the snow belt, but do not lose Bob Snow to re redevelopment.
By all measures, keep the historic train depot. aim for a tenant that's not going to go away and think outside the the the box. My thoughts keep drifting to Apple, a company like Apple, but not not just
Apple, but an Apple mega store. The creatives would salivate at the opportunity to repurpose the fabric of the old depot consciously ushering the past into the expanding future. Offer a rent package they cannot refuse. initial rent
incentives in exchange for Apple providing security as the technology arrives and it will have a vision of friendly robots, snowbots who offer information, directions, weather reports, etc. All
done while filming 360 degrees for security, crime and loss prevention measures. This is going to happen somewhere sometime. And why not us? Orlando is a if you build it they will come city. Build [clears throat] this and watch Bob Snows millions of tourists
start coming back to downtown Orlando in a safe, unique, charming and functional atmosphere. Lastly, thank you. [laughter] Thank you Rachel Williams. Jerry Mththeni,
Jeff Keo. >> Hello, my name is Rachel Williams. I'm the historian at the Orange County Regional History Center, but I am representing myself as a concerned citizen. Um, the Orange County Regional History Center is located at 65 East Central Boulevard. It's housed in a
previous county courthouse, which is which was built nearly 100 years ago. Um, I hope my personal and professional perspective can provide some insight on this issue. Um, many people believe that Orlando's history started in 1971 when Disney came to town. Uh, and perhaps
part of that is due to the ever dwindling number of historic buildings in the area. The area is rich in history and most notably probably is the business history here. Spanning from cattle to citrus to military to tourism, Orlando has been on a trajectory of
growth and development. Long before Disney came here, historic buildings downtown um or sorry, historic buildings in downtown districts in general offer a charm that attracts locals and tourists alike looking to the artful craftsmanship once present in
architecture that has been lost to sleek dominating highrises and that litter downtown landscapes today. Seeking a historical building amidst the modern lifeless skyscrapers is like seeing a living piece of art or a living piece of history. While I understand the allure
of private investment, I don't see why we can't strike a balance between historic preservation within a modern landscape. Why can't we repurpose buildings while preserving their uh historic nature? I've seen council statements in the media ensuring that this is the goal. However, bypassing the
historic preservation boards seems counterintuitive and contradictory to this mission. Why aren't they being included in this decision? Look at cities that have leaned into their history as a factor of driving tourism. Savannah, New Orleans, St.
Augustine, for example. These cities have thriving historic districts because they market their history as a vector of tourism. We can do the same because Orlando's history is more than just Disney. Before we lose what's left of our architectural history, I implore the
council to listen to the uh concerned citizens, have discussions with local historians, and weigh the options here. There is value in preservation. There's economic value in promoting the history of the city. Revitalization should not
come at the cost of erasing our living history. Thank you. >> Thank you, [applause] Jerry Mthany. Jeff Yeito and Kino Martinez. >> Good afternoon, mayor, commissioners, and staff. Uh my name is Jerry Mththeni,
uh VP of brokerage at First Capital Property Group. Uh we're a fullervice commercial brokerage here uh in the city of Orlando. Uh for approximately 15 years I've worked in downtown Orlando commercial real estate uh representing property owners, investors and businesses with a significant portion uh
of that work involving older and historic properties including nearly a dozen historic properties in downtown Orlando. Uh we've presided over multiple facade improvement projects and more than 100,000 square feet of renovation uh in downtown Orlando's historic
buildings. And I can tell you first firsthand experience navigating the HPB review process is a significant challenge that is 100% impacting the amount of incoming capital that we're seeing that's looking to invest in
downtown Orlando. I support the proposed 36-month pause uh because I believe it creates an opportunity to reduce uncertainty uh encourage investment and improve the feasibility of projects involving older downtown buildings. Um,
long before a project reaches final decision point, investors are evaluating historic properties not only for the property itself, but also for the anticipated review process, timeline, and likelihood of successfully executing their vision for the project. Uh, for
many investors evaluating these properties, that review process is perceived as challenging, uncertain, and difficult to predict. And as a result, it often becomes part of the investment analysis long before uh any of these
formal applications are submitted to HPB for review. Um that perception can influence whether an opportunity moves forward in the level of capital that's ultimately committed. Why does this matter? That uncertainty translate into additional carrying costs as a gentleman
mentioned earlier, consultant costs, longer timelines, and in some cases higher financing costs. Um and I my position representing property owners and investors evaluating these opportunities. I have seen the historic review process present meaningful challenges during evaluation and
underwriting of certain projects including situations where obtaining clarity regarding relatively minor issues prove significantly difficult. Why is this especially important for downtown? Uh the downtown district is located directly within the path of
growth and represents one of the most visible opportunities for adaptive reuse, redevelopment, and reinvestment into downtown Orlando. However, when uncertainty surrounding those opportunities increases, reinvestment may occur more slowly. Uh fewer groups may be willing to pursue these projects
and capital may ultimately be directed towards opportunities in other markets that are perceived as more predictable. uh sometimes resulting in lost opportunities for investment, job creation, property improvement, and economic activity in downtown Orlando. I
believe the more successful we are at reducing uh uncertainty and encouraging investment, the more likely we are to see investment in the buildings and properties that contribute to the character and economic vitality of downtown Orlando. Thank you. >> Thank you,
Jeff Gito. And then Kino Martinez. Hello, mayor, council. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today on this. Uh to be uh upfront, uh my name is Jeffrey Jetto, 116 South Orange Avenue,
3281. I do own commercial uh real estate that's historic, and I do own commercial uh residences, but I'm not a developer. Um, I'm a downtown business owner and I've been downtown for about 30 years. Um, I think I serve in a unique position in the fact that I I I'm fortunate to
have those things that I just said, but also seen Orlando through quite a bit in 30 years from House Music to, you know, Black Monday, uh, uh, COVID, Pulse, the Great Recession, a lot like so much I I can
forget it. But um I have to say I am in support of this. Um and I know for some people who might put me in a box, the box is not what you think it is. But um from a from a reality of development downtown,
the HPB in and of itself uh can cause more delays and cause much more expenses. Um for example, uh there are two balconies on Orange Avenue that weren't there. Um, I had to work with
Mr. Frank Billingsley for a while. Probably took a year and a half to get those balconies approved. Uh, we had to send steel to Massachusetts to be to be tested three times. You know, just just a lot. And I think you go through that
PTSD once or twice. Uh, it just sets in and it becomes almost a thing. kind of like how right now people think downtown is unsafe and and that's that's that's a subjective thing I think on some levels, right? Because we're talking about vibrancy of downtown. So, we've got
downtown, our stats are a little safer, but people still think it's unsafe. My point is the disconnect between what people think and what things are. Um, I'm in support of this because I think at the we're kind of all as a community
really trying to find what is wrong. you know what our identity kind of is our town and why haven't we been able to get out of that with Church Street being a classic example. Um I wish I had the answer. I wouldn't be up here supporting uh you know putting a
moratorium on the historic preservation board and I was very much part of a lot of the downtown Orlando venues. Um what we had to collectively go to the table with the stakeholders. Nobody left the table happy. I don't think anybody leaves this table happy. I think it's a
it's just a pure bat swing. My obviously my opinion, you know, but but at the end of the day, you know, there there's not a lot of there's not a lot more tools in the tool belt to kind of go after this. Um I I like to
think about um 15 seconds. Okay. Philosophy, Hobbes versus Russo. Russo, man is either inherently good or inherently self-interested. I think that see what people do with the historic uh assets that they purchase. I think they'll surprise you.
>> Thank you, Kino Martinez. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, commissioners. Kino Martinez, 215 North Yola Drive, Orlando 32801. Um, like like several others, I was also a history major. Um, I live in a 100
plus year old home and I work in a building that John Louns and and partners bought in the early 80s. Um, a really nice uh older building on Lake Eola. But I'm here today with respect to support the three-year moratorum on
obtaining a certificate of appropriateness. And I want to tell you why. Um, one, I think this is a meaningful acceleration tool um, for downtown redevelopment. And I think there's five reasons why uh, why that can be. I think we have a little bit of
a log jam in terms of bringing capital um, and some of the development that will support the retail that we all talk about wanting downtown. And I think this is something that could spur development. And I think there's five reasons why. First, it reduces entitlement uncertainty. The current
process creates an additional discretionary layer uh for adaptive reuse, facade work, additions, new construction. That uncertainty affects underwriting. Rem removing or pausing that layer for the downtown historic district could shorten timelines and
make downtown projects easier to finance. Second, it makes older buildings easier to reuse. Many downtown buildings are not economically obsolete because they lack value. They are obsolete because of the cost, the time, and the risk of reuse are too
high. A temporary pause could encourage owners to renovate vacant or underused building buildings, especially if review is redirected through predictable downtown design standards. Third, it can attract earlier private capital. Capital, as Mr. Matheni suggested,
capital follows certainty. A three-year window creates urgency. owners, developers, and tenants know there's a temporary period in which projects may move faster. Fourth, it supports restaurant, retail, and office recruitment. Restaurants and retailers
need activated streets and improved building stock. Office users need modernized buildings and amenity environments. If the MT mor moratorum helps bring vacant or underutilized downtown properties back into productive use, it can improve the core downtown
environment that premium tenants require. Fifth, and finally, Orlando is already advancing district scale projects such as create a village, West Court, and the packing district. It can reinforce Orlando's existing downtown development
strategy. This targeted moratorum could complement that strategy by improving the smaller scale building fabric between major projects, filling gaps, activating storefronts, and reducing dead zones. Thank you. >> Thank you. That was the end of the
public testimony. So, Commissioner Sheen, you'll be first up, but why don't we take exactly a fiveminut break and then we'll be first up with your presentation. finish, >> but you can get set up during that five
minutes. All right. be the first time I've used that in 23 years. >> All right, Commissioner Sheen, you're up. >> Thank you, Mayor Dyer. Is the presentation up yet? There we go.
>> Okay. I know it's a little unprecedented for a city commissioner to make a presentation at city council. Um there's a reason for that because I feel very strongly about what's happening here today. I'm the longest serving member of this board. I've run every single time
on historic preservation and I represent most of the historic districts in my in you know in in Orlando except for the downtown which I used to have which I lost to district 5 in redistricting. So this is very very important to me and this is why I'm making this presentation
today. It pains me to be at odds with my friends, my staff, my legal department. It pains me but I think what I have to say today is very very important. We start from shared goals. We all want a vi we we've talked today all day long about want about shared goals. We all
want a vibrant downtown, more investment, more housing, thriving businesses, historic character, and an efficient review. We all want the same things. We are not that far apart. What is the downtown HP overlay
district? It was established in 1980, has 66 contributing buildings. It's 35 acres. The DTO study area is 59 acres and the CRA district is 1,664
acres. Yet they're blaming 35 acres for the problems of six 1,664 acres. I don't think that's fair. This is the Legacy 9. These are the these are the buildings that we are most likely to lose through this process. And
everyone keeps saying this is not a demolition process. Guess what? If you don't have historic preservation, you will have demolition. That's just how it works. Historic preservation stops demolition. That's what historic preservation does. And I think it's important to look at we could what we
could potentially lose here. Bumby Hardware, 1886. The Rogers Keaney building that Ford Keaney so generously donated to us would no longer have protections from subsequent city councils. The old
railway depot 1890. These buildings have been around for a long time. The Hunt Brandon building is the native social bar right now. The Nicholson Collier building. This is actually on the Florida Black Heritage Trail. The
Slemen's Department Store, which was the centerpiece of Rosio Grady's. And I'm channeling my friend Bob Snow today. I'm wearing one of his belt buckles, which I bought at his estate sale. The man had a huge investment in in beauty and he knew what he was doing and he knew his story.
H history mattered. The Beachum Theater, it might not look great right now, but it was our big, you know, it was our big theater in downtown. The first national bank, it's a beautiful building. And also the Crest building. This is one that I can point
to where the developer and the owner has done the right thing. Rob Jagger is committed to historic preservation. He's committed to having his buildings rented out. He has wonderful tenants and he's a successful businessman. Maybe instead of talking about tearing everything down, we should look about what Rob's doing
right. The central claim is that historic preservation regulations are severely impeding redevelopment and contributing to downtown blight. Has sufficient evidence been presented to support that conclusion? The larger the policy change, the
stronger the evidence required and we should have time to evaluate that. Many of my colleagues here tonight today have asked, well, we're getting in tonight have asked about this process and everything like that. I've been on this council, like I say, since for 26 years
and longest serving member, I have never seen anything jam through this quickly without any public input. It's distressing to me. The larger the policies change, the stronger the evidence should be required. We have 45 years of preservation policy. This affects an
entire district, not a single project. And this is 36 months a path to permanent destruction. This ordinance is the largest possible change. Where is the largest possible evidence? The burden of proof. The DTO action plan. What does downtown need most? DTO
professionally commissioned a study of downtown as a whole to identify what works and what needs improvement to facilitate pedestrian activity and contribute to a sense of vibrancy. The downtown district historic district has the highest metrics. It's in the DTO
plan. Why does the DTO show the downtown historic district with some of the highest metrics if it's causing blight? Again, this is from the DTO action plan. Block quality. Block quality considers the size of the block, how the uses
cover the block, and how many uses are in that block. The area that we're talking about is very high. It's actually good. Why are you blaming it for for the problems in downtown when the when the historic district is actually very good and
highly rated in the DTO action plan? Connected structure measures the urban fabric's connectivity, walkability, and integrity. Downtown has a relatively well-connected street structure, particularly in the central part of the downtown core. It's good. We have good
bones here. Downtown is exceptional bones. Small blocks on the present sidewalks of good dimension and geometry cover the downtown. Pine Street between Orange Avenue, Rosalind Avenue is the portrait of a high performer. This experience of
strong bone should be an example moving forward. Again, I'm getting all this from DTO action plan, the DT, the same DTO that wants to destroy the historic district. What the ordinance actually changes, and y'all please, if you could just listen to me on this. This is so important to
me. The current process is the property owner goes before historic preservation board review. They have the right to appeal. City council has the final decision. the proposed moratorum. The property owner goes directly to appearance review and then they can pull
a demolition permit after they after they show their plans. This does not protect historic buildings. Substantive historic review is replaced by lighter appearance review. Demolition review is downgraded from major to minor. I can't
pres I can't stress that enough. Demolishing an old building is major. It's not minor. Has the board actually stopped redevelopment? No. Zero times has the historic preservation board rejected applications from the downtown district
in the past 5 years. No. Zero. There have been no preapp requests to demolish any buildings in the past 5 years. HPB has approved numerous requests for storefront redevelopment, awnings, and outdoor cafes. These are all of the projects that have
been approved by the Historic Preservation Board that everybody's saying, "Oh, they're they're stopping everything." One South Orange approved, new glass storefront. 19 South Orange, a new cafe. 63 North Orange, a new cafe. 190 South Orange, new storefront,
removing the granite granite base and and replacing all the ground floor windows with doors. 100 Now North Orange, new storefront, Nana Wall Doors and Cafe. If y'all don't know what nano walls are, they're basically glass. You can't get more modern than that. Okay. But the Historic Preservation Board
approved that. 130 South Orange, new overhead doors. 18 Wall Street, new awnings, balconies, storefront replacing second story windows with doors. These are the these are projects that have all been approved by historic preservation board. This is
one that was approved. 18 Wall Street. major certificate of appropriateness, removing the awning, adding a balcony, converting two windows to doorways. It it was reviewed and approved. The process allows change before and after. This this is the first National
Bank building at 190 South Orange. They removed the ground floor windows and replaced them with doorways for a new interior layout. This is where the um Walgreens was. So, the board did approve significant changes to allow this re adaptive reuse.
And again, this slide 61 East Pine Street, the Robinson Cocktail Room, this outdoor cafe was approved. Historic preservation minor review process is a fasttracked way to make approvals easier. Then, this photo was taken from the DTO action plan showing what's
working downtown. These are some of the past approvals. City staff has said that HPB will not allow new awnings or overhangs for outdoor cafes unless they are exact copies of the originals. This is Church Street Station. None of this is original. Bob Snow created all this. HPB
approved new balconies, columns, row iron railings, awnings, outdoor cafes, and even a bridge. None of which were there before. And I love this. I hope we keep this because I think it's cool. Like Paul said, I think it's amazing. I think we should keep these these these beautiful amenities.
Staff claims there are no more federal tax credits or state grants. There are federal tax credits and state grants. They're both available. Staff claims the moratorum does not eliminate demolition protections. The the moratorum eliminates protections. That's why I'm
so passionately speaking against this today. Once a building permit has been issued, the demolition cannot be refused. Cannot be refused. at all. There are staff claims there are few cities with downtown historic districts and only Savannah comes to mind. There
are hundreds of cities in the US with downtown historic districts. When I travel, I don't say, "Gee, where are the highest economic impact buildings in in your in your city?" I say, "Where are your landmarks? Don't we all do that?" So, how is this against economic
development? And what is at stake? Orlando stands to lose significant financial incentives under a moratorum. Since 21 there have been 265 historic tax credit projects that's in Florida
overall total development costs over 1.5 billion nearly 270 million in historic tax credits and it's created over need nearly 24,000 jobs. Three projects have qualified in Orlando. The Aloft Hotel,
$4 million tax credit. Baptist Terrace Apartments in my district, $3 and half million dollar tax credit. And the LIG building, $91,000 tax credit. Any demolished building will no longer be eligible for these tax credits. And if someone wants to apply
for them, someone wants to do the right thing, we're in danger at losing all of these fun all of this funding. This is an example of true adaptive reuse. The OU becomes a loft. The property owner went through HPB review. Adaptive reuse approved. The owner received a $4
million tax credit. It was adapted, not fully restored, to its original design, and it still won approval. The standards are not too restrictive. And what's at stake? I am distressed at being at odds with my legal department,
but I have been in touch with Tyler Smith at the Florida Department of State. And if we pass this today, we will be descertified today. We will lose grant money today. That's why I am begging for this to be deferred. Okay. Since 1981 to 2016, the
public and private historic preservation grants awarded in Orlando through local government grants. 17 different grants awarded totaling $3.7 million. Okay. From 2017 to 2027, public and private
historic preservation grants awarded in Orlando from eight different grants. $3.67 million. This is not the chump change that was that was talked about. And the projects included Carowak House, St. Luke's Cathedral Church, Black Bottom House of Prayer. Remember we all
fought to to save that. Maxi Kroom's house, Plaza Live in my district is a beautiful building. They got the they got it historic they got this historic redone. The little the little thing at top that spins. It's beautiful. The Williams Wells House, the Wells, you know, that was so important to the
African-American community. The Lou House and the Lake Oven Power Plant. These are all projects that receive state funding and we will not be eligible for this anymore if we do this today. Again, these are these important
historic buildings that I think and I think the majority of Orlando anyway, the ones that I've knocked on their door over 15,000 of them and talked to this is important to them. These buildings are important to them.
This is this is preservation done right. the Crest building. I can't say enough good things about Rob Jagger because he's the only one doing it the right way. He received $54,000 for exterior cleaning, painting, and canopy repair under a 2022 CRA grant. He has active
tenants. He's he is going to expand the Crest building. There are Crest buildings, by the way, all over America. And the lesson here is investment and historic view are working together, not against each other. The Hurst building in Manhattan. The
staff has referenced the Hurst building in Manhattan as a shining example of what downtown developers could do if the Historic Preservation Board was not in the way. It can be done in Orlando. The city of Orlando follows the exact same interior
standards as New York City. The ordinance stops demolition, not development. Maybe HPB is not the problem. Maybe it's the developers. >> [applause] >> and and HPB tried in Orlando. They're
here are the minutes from the HPB hearing. They voted to retain the facades of the McCroy's and Wilwworth buildings in 2003. They they ended up getting torn down. I voted against that. I think I was the only one on that one, too. Okay. There
are It's been said there are no other Florida downtown historic districts. There are 31 downtown historic districts with nine districts in large cities in Florida, including Miami, Jacksonville, and West Palm Beach.
Other national downtown historic districts, downtown Chicago, downtown Boston, downtown Los Angeles. Estimates indicate that hundreds of US cities ranging from major metropolises to midsize municipalities possess
overlaying historic districts directly in their downtown directly in their downtown business centers. directly in their downtown business centers. All right. And this is the case study on on Wworth McCrories. All right. Council
has already used this authority to approve a downtown demolition redevelopment under the current framework. Under the current framework, we don't have to do this and lose all our state funding in our historic preservations. Okay. What happened in Wworth McCory's? There was historic preservation review. Then there was an
appeal. Council overrode the HPB. They demolished it hours later and they redeveloped it. Okay. The current process did not block redevelopment and the system bends when the case is made. But newer is not
better. All right. The only place we had to shop in downtown was the McCrory's building because it had some cool little shops in it. All right. Now we have the plaza. And this is Cameron Cun celebrating when they tore down the buildings. The developer of the plaza went bankrupt. The building was
foreclosed on. The theaters in most of the retail spaces are vacant. And the former Court Street is now a CD service alley. By midnight on the day it was approved, the bulldozers had begun to raise the buildings and the developer celebrated making way for the plaza and Salera.
Newer is now better. We invested $6 million in CRA funds to build the Plaza's movie theater. I voted for it. I voted against the demolition, but I voted for this. It opened in 2009 and now it's closed.
Demolition and new construction do not guarantee success. Management does. New or already failed a block away with public money. Again, these are some pictures of the plaza. Tell me how vibrant
this is. Tell me how beautiful this is. Tell me why we had to lose the few storefronts that we had along Orange Avenue where I go across the street and buy a card. Tell me why that's so important that had to go away. So get a closed escalator, garbage in the in the in the garages and
empty store more empty storefronts. This is just more empty storefronts in new buildings. Mandrean and Salera, they have empty storefronts. Plaza, Salera, and 2011 South Orange, all empty storefronts. 55 West, Morgan
and Morgan, Regions's Bank and the Society, all empty storefronts. Not in the historic district. All right. Newer is not better. Society, steel house, and radius. We require firstf flooror retail. They let it sit there vacant.
Land banking is the problem, folks. Not historic preservation. Who is actually restricting downtown? We some of these some of the folks who come by today talked about the interest rates, the high cost, construction costs, crime and safety. Land banking I feel is the biggest problem because
these folks buy these buildings and then they sit on them and they buy historic buildings and say, "Oh, gee, the answer is to just tear them all down." Parking is a concern and mismanagement. There is no reason why these buildings shouldn't be full. I have friends that
had businesses along Church Street that were harassed and kicked out by their by their landlords. All right. If you don't let your if you don't let your tenants use the bathroom and it's a restaurant, that's a big deal. This is the kind of monkey business these folks are doing
and then they say they can't rent their spaces. All right, [applause and cheering] council already has the final word word, y'all. The HPB makes a recommendation, not final decisions. Those
recommendations can be appealed. The city council already holds final authority over every project. If council already decides, why suspend preservation protections districtwide for three years? And why lose all that that federal and state money? It makes
no sense. These are the buildings that we could lose. The Tinker Building built in 1925. The Crest building built in 1935. The Nicholson Collier building and I want to talk about that. that it carries immense cultural and historical weight as a
milestone for black entrepreneurship in Central Florida. It is featured on the Black Florida Black Heritage Trail. My proposal today is to defer the second vote in light of this new information.
[applause] Everybody in the room said, "Let's have more discussion." Okay, let's do that. Defer the second vote. allow for a more thorough evaluation of historic preservation and its impacts. You've heard people say, "Save the facades. We're okay with redevelopment." We don't
do that. We But we can't do that if you can demolish the facades willy-nilly like this ordinance allows. Bring people together, city staff, historic preservation board, and our historic preservation officer. And if anybody goes after her, I'll be the first one to testify at her perk
hearing. She was not included in this, and we have treated her badly. It's not fair. She has a master's degree in historic preservation. She's probably the most educated and knowledgeable historic preservation officer in the state of Florida. And she was left out of this process. [applause]
Property owners and the public. The property owner should be included as well. Absolutely. Not this rush to demolish our shared history. We all agree that the city and property owners need to do more to reactivate all of downtown. All city policies should be reviewed in a transparent method to
determine their impact on redevelopment. And the city should look to other cities for successful best practices like we have on everything. The city has not shown that preservation is the cause. The city's own data shows downtown is
already growing under the current framework. But slow down, demand the evidence. Improve the process. Don't suspend it. Don't throw our historic preservation out. And I'm going to be clear about why I voted against the Church Streetscape last last week. I
didn't put it together because I was having to read this all at the same time on the day as I saw this this ordinance coming through. Why would we pay for a church? I I am I think that a streetscape makes sense supporting an historic district because it's a public
benefit use. But if we're going to let Shore Street be demolished, why should we be paying the freight for the developers? They should pay for their own streetscape. [applause] And you know y'all, it's not like I didn't try to talk to staff, okay? I tried to work I always try to work with
staff on these issues, but I c could not because this was not done in the right way. And I'm begging you to slow this process down. And this 30 days is not enough because we're going to if we vote on this today, we are going to immediately lose the ability to get that
state funding, state and federal funding. And my problem is why should we reward the people who don't want to do historic preservation while punishing the people that do? Because that money is going to be gone and it will gone forever as well. Thank you. [applause] [applause]
>> [applause] >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Sheen. Um, just a couple quick points. Council retains final authority over the developments under either scenario. Ultimately, anything that goes through in this new process comes right here,
just like it would if it went through the old process. The problem is none of that stuff ever makes it to council because it's killed um either because developers don't have any certainty whatsoever whenever they go through this process or they're not um willing to
make it. We had five at least five different people that work in that area get up and say I can't advise my clients to work in this process because they have no shity. Um we're not trying to blame the historic district. We're looking at the rest of DTO which is
thriving. We've got development everywhere except there. So, we're wanting to help the historic district and I will agree with the notion that everybody in this room I think wants the same thing which is a vibrant historic district. And we disagree on how to get
there. But we do know one got up and said this process is working for the people that want to invest money there. Commissioner Barnes. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor, and thank you, [clears throat] uh, Commissioner, for that presentation because there were a
lot of things that, uh, you brought up that, uh, I was not aware of, but I did have a question for staff and, and mayor, maybe you can answer this as well. Has the city ever offered incentives for the redevelopment of these properties uh, similar to what we
we're proposing, uh, incentive program? I'll let David respond to that, but we've had, at least during the time period that I've been here, any number of different type of incentive programs aimed at the downtown. >> But I mean, to the level that we're that
we're proposing now, you know, cuz facades are one thing, but when we're talking about the recapture of, [clears throat] you know, taxes and things of that nature, that's a lot more significant than what I've seen. >> That that is correct, Commissioner. We have done uh extensive facade grant programs. We even extended them,
allowing for the CRA to pay for 80% of those uh refurbishments to enhance facads. And as you know, we also created the restaurant incentive program, which you just approved uh some today that can apply up to $400,000 of incentives. Uh but to the extent of what you mentioned, what we'll be proposing at our next
meeting, uh having very extensive tax increment recaptures specifically targeted to historic structure structures, that would be new for us. >> That would be new. So we have not done that. All right. And so so so my my next question is um
kind of associated with the certainty um because I keep hearing that developers want certainty and I know you know when you make an investment you want certainty and and some of these projects don't even get to the municipal planning board. Um,
have there been any ideas brought up that that we can create more certainty for these developers without um bypassing the municipal planning board? Has there been a discussion? I mean historic uh uh preservation board.
>> Yeah, it's been trying to understand what is working. Uh and what we did find out for those developers is what process that we have that they did feel provided them that certainty that they were willing to make investments. uh as you know oftentimes before they would even come talk to the city there's hundreds
of thousands of dollars spent either on even potential acquisition or getting plans and reports done to make sure that their plans are feasible and can have some chance of success. Um what we heard back was that at the process that we have was similar is the appearance review process which is kind of um what
started the conversation of aligning the review process for all of downtown. >> So they're saying the appearance review process has been the barrier. No, they're saying that that process has worked in providing that certainty while also preserving good architectural values.
>> Okay. And then uh the other one is my other question is associated with the 30-day notification. I know Mayor you said that we received legal guidance from our attorney that it doesn't apply to us. Um Commissioner Shean presented
information that counters that. Uh, so I would like, you know, I don't know if our city attorney can chime in and >> Stacy. >> Good afternoon, commissioners, mayor. Stacy Fallon, assistant city attorney. The guidelines require us to provide a 30-day review for amendments to our
local preservation ordinance. This moratorium, as proposed, does not amend our local preservation ordinance. It is not a code change. It is not a cotification. The overlay remains. The local preservation ordinance remains
intact. It's our position that this is a change of a rule of procedure which requires notification in our annual reporting which was always the intent to do so. >> And with all due respect, um the state
is saying that this will make our CLG null and void as of adoption. So I just want to make that clear. I didn't get that from our attorneys. I talked directly to the source and I think the state knows what their rules are probably better than we do apparently because I think it's important to
present the proper information. Again, I do not like being at odds with staff, but I also think it's important since this is an important issue to the public that this be transparent. [applause] >> You done, Commissioner Burns? >> I'm I'm finished. Thank Uh, Commissioner Chapen.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I've received a lot of input on this subject, both sides. Um, as everybody's pointed out, we all love downtown. Um, I've also received a letter in the email saying that, uh,
historic funding could could be at risk if we, uh, move this fast. We're getting uh our attorney's uh opinion on that and we're also going to uh delay enactment uh in order to make sure that happens.
Um I think it's, you know, an argument that's difficult to reconcile. Over the past seven years, we've watched the state increasingly preempt local decisions making uh and today advancing measures that could remove billions of dollars from local government. So against that
backdrop, I find it difficult to accept the argument that Orlando should alter its local planning decisions because of a relatively small amount of state funding might be at risk. My responsibility is not to Tallahassee. My responsibilities to the residents of Orlando. And the message I hear over and
over again is simple. People want a downtown that feels alive again. People are concerned about affordable housing, public safety, economic opportunity, transportation, and the future. I want to address the notion that
supporting this moratorum somehow means I don't appreciate downtown's legacy. Nothing could be further from the truth. I grew up in Orlando. As a young man, I worked at Church Street Station as a guest service host. I also valet parked cars for a different company alongside
plenty of Boone High School and Florida State students who came home during the summers and the holidays. Back then, downtown Orlando was one of the most vibrant destinations in Florida. I remember seeing John Anderson at Cheyenne Saloon. He was right down the road from Apakka. Mayor Dyer, you
remember him? >> Sure. >> 30 years later, I can still remember that music. In fact, some of us probably still know every word of seminal wind. What I don't remember was the color of the grout. And I think that's part of the point. I
remember nickel beer night at Phineas Fogs. I remember World Cup when it was downtown. It was packed with fans from around the world. What made those memories special wasn't the buildings. It was the people. And that's exactly why this issue
matters to me. I've gone back and reviewed more than a decade of historic preservation minutes this whole week. And to repeat, uh, Mr. Usler, this is not HPB members fault. This is the fault
of the ordinance. This is what they're dealing with. Not laying blame here. But I found repeated examples where property owners like Brian Wilson, who testified today, sought to invest in historic buildings, including the historic train depot, which proposed new restaurants,
meeting space, outdoor dining, and a new activity while preserving the building itself. Mr. Price said to be innovative. This plan was innovative. Yet much of the discussion focused on mural colors, materials, lighting, awnings, grout,
picket fences, and even where elevators should be, bathroom should be, and kitchen should be. The question isn't whether we preserved an awning, approved a mural color, or debated the location of the bathroom. The question is whether downtown Orlando is producing the
housing activity, investment, and vibrancy our residents want. I've also heard critics suggest that if historic preservation board denies a project, the city council can simply override the decision. Respectfully,
that's not how government should work. We can't simply ignore our own ordinances. And if we overturn a denial, the ordinance remains in place. And if that decision is appealed, a court will not ask whether the council wanted more housing, more investment, or more
vibrant downtown. the court will ask whether we follow the ordinance. That means the same uncertainty, the same delays, and the same conflict simply move to the next project. The reality is that that uncertainty doesn't just affect the projects that
get denied. It affects the projects that never got proposed in the first place. I've also heard criticism we're moving too fast. Frankly, my question is, what took us so long? The concerns reflected in the minutes span years. The frustrations expressed by property
owners, business owners, and applicants span more than a decade. But this issue extends far beyond those directly involved in the process. One of the questions I'm asked most often from citizens is simple. How do we fix downtown? Residents want more activity. They want more restaurants. They want
more housing. They want more people living downtown. They want a downtown that feels vibrant, safe, and alive. The results speak for themselves. Over the past 15 years, other parts of downtown have seen significant investment. Meanwhile, the historic preservation overlay has seen no comparable
investment. At some point, we have to stop debating process and start evaluating outcomes. In one, if one area of downtown is attracting investment while others remain largely stagnant, we have a responsibility to ask why. I believe the
ordinance and the uncertainty it creates are a significant part of that answer. This conversation is long overdue. I can tell you I've had plenty of input. I've visited with neighbors in their kitchen counters. I've emailed constituents. I've read news stories. I've seen social
media because what creates a sense of place. As Betsy Owen stated, we've got we've got some great senses of place. Ottabbon Park, Lou Gardens, our main streets, they are all great, but I can tell you
our residents are giving up on downtown. Is it buildings alone or is it people? I argue it's people. Building by themselves do not create a sense of place. People do. If we want walkability, affordability, sustainability, and a vibrant downtown,
we need more people living downtown. A historic building with no tenants, no customers, no residents, and no investment may be preserved physically, but it's not preserved as a living part of the city. My concern is that the ordinance this
council adopted decades ago was written for a different time in a different downtown. Today, it just makes it extraordinarily difficult to produce the housing, investment, economic activity, and downtown vitality that residents consistently tell me they want to see.
This is not a vote to elimmit historic preservation. It's these plans still need to be re reviewed by the ARB, the appearance review board. Planning, building, fire. Apparent review board is no walk in the park. I can tell you that. After listening to consistent reviewing the
record and looking at the condition of downtown, I do not believe the current ordinance is producing the results our residents want. And perhaps the most important question we should be asking ourselves today is this. Are we creating the next generation of downtown memories?
I believe we can respect respect our history while also creating a path towards more housing, more investment, more economic opportunity. I believe there's a difference between preserving history and freezing history. The best way to preser historic buildings is to keep them relevant, occupied, invested
in, and economically viable. The purpose of preservation should not be to freeze downtown in time. The purpose of preservation be to ensure that our history remains a living and productive part of the city. We should honor our past, but we should allow policies we should not allow polic policies adapted
decades ago to prevent us from building the future our citizens want and deserve. For those reason, I will be supporting the moratorum. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Keane. >> Thank you, Mayor. [clears throat] And try to keep this fairly brief here.
We we've had a long afternoon. Orlando's downtown historic district has uh lacked, as we've heard today, major investments over the last 15 years. This targeted moratorum evaluates existing regulations that may be hindering projects within the within the business district. So, I want to be
clear that I support the moratorum today, the temporary moratorum, because it allows us to better understand how we can preserve our historic character while ensuring downtown is still economically competitive. Preservation is most successful when buildings are occupied, maintained, and economically viable. And
again, I'm repeating what folks on both sides have have said today. I want to thank Commissioner Sheen for her very uh very good remarks today and for to Commissioner Chapen as well. We have good people on both sides. I also want to thank the people who came to speak to
me about this uh in in my office including members of the historic preservation board as well as those that are very passionate about the preservation of Orlando who emailed me their thoughts and concerns. But this mortorium is a way for that I believe is a way to
balance historic preservation as well as the economic development needs of the city. Thank you. >> Thank you commissioner. Commissioner Rose. >> Uh thank you to everyone who came to speak today. Um, thank you, Commissioner Shehan, for sharing your views on the ordinance. My support for the moratorum
is rooted in a broader goal, accelerating downtown revitalization and removing barriers that may be preventing investment, redevelopment, and housing opportunities here in our urban core. Downtown Orlando continues to face significant challenges. As shown in the vid in the pictures that Commissioner
Sheen in her presentation, we have vacant properties, underutilized buildings, declining foot track foot traffic, and a need for a moratorum that creates an opportunity for more residential and commercial activity. The proposed moratorium is intended to
provide a temporary window to evaluate whether our current review processes are unintentionally discouraging developments that could help bring people, businesses, and economic activity back to downtown. This is not about eliminating historic preservation. Orlando remains committed to preserving
its history and cultural assets. There have been stated concerns about demolition, but I want to reiterate the policy for those who do not understand it and do not know it. It will remain the same, which means that HPB staff will review and approve de demolition of any historic buildings only when the
developer has all permits and is ready to start construction. Which would mean there would have been an extensive process including ARB, municipal planning, and the city's council's review and approval, which includes public opportunity and input.
Rather, this is a temporary measure designed to create flexibility while we assess how preservation policies intersect with city's economic development, housing, and redevelopment goals. I believe the moratorium will help us better understand whether regulatory changes can encourage investment in areas that have struggled
to attract redevelopment while also allowing the city time to review the and modernize its long-term approach to preservation and growth. Ultimately, the focus here is creating a vibrant, economically healthy downtown that serves residents, businesses, and all visitors alike. I believe this temporary
pause provides an opportunity to better balance preserving our history and ensuring downtown Orlando can successfully adapt to current and future needs. >> Commissioner Sheen, >> uh, I see which way this is going, but I just want to say one thing. This
decision was made on a map that showed investment in downtown $5 million and up. The thing is, if you're going to put a restaurant in a historic building, you don't need to spend $5 million. It's cheaper to do the renovation. So, it going right off the
bat, the chart that we were shown is it was one to to disincent to not show the truth. There are no there are empty storefronts all over downtown, not just in the historic district. So, it's very frustrating to me to hear that this is
going to be a a panacea somehow because there are empty storefronts all over downtown. I've often said that we need to start finding people with empty storefronts. Maybe that would make a difference, but we can't because it's unconstitutional. Um, all permits in they can demolish as
long as they get the permits and it's demolished. So, the reason all these folks here are upset today and the reason I'm upset today is because I care about the history of the city. I care about these buildings that have been here much longer than I have been and will be here and will I had hoped would
be here long after I live. And uh I'm deeply distressed by this decision. Um I don't I do not think it's going to be the um the the silver bullet that everybody thinks it's going to be. And as a historic preservationist, I'm appalled, horrified, and very
disappointed. Okay, I want to thank everybody for being I want to thank everybody for being civil today. We sometimes have discussions and it's not so civil. Um, everybody isn't going to get the exact
result they want, but you can be comfortable in knowing that everybody in this room has the exact same goal and that is to have a great flourishing downtown and especially in the historic district. So this is a step we believe and getting there. So all in favor of
the motion indicate so by saying I. I. >> Those opposed. >> No. >> Okay. I got it. 42. Commissioner Ortiz not being present. Okay. Motion carries. Okay. We still have a lot more business to do. So those of you who don't want to
remain for that are eligible to leave. That would be why I'm sweating. about. >> Okay, Madame Clerk, are you ready? >> Yes, mayor. >> Okay, we're on ordinances first to read number 13A.
Ordinance number 2026-16, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Orlando, Florida, amending the city's adopted growth management plan to change the future land use map designation for seven parcels of land within the Florida Hospital Health Village, DRRi, generally located east of I4, north of East New Hampshire Street,
south of Westchester Avenue and west of North Mills Avenue, and comprised of approximately 2.92 acres, providing for amendment of of the city's official future land use maps, providing for severability, correction of scrier errors, and an effective date. >> Move approval.
>> Second. >> Motion by Commissioner Chapen, second by Commissioner Burns. Um I don't have any requests for public comment on this discussion. Hearing none. All in favor of the motion indicated so by saying I.
>> Those opposed. Motion carries 13B. Ordinance number 2026-17, an ordinance of the city council of city of Orlando, Florida, amending the Florida Hospital health village plan development zoning ordinance to add approximately 2.92 acres of land to the plan development zoning district. Such
land being generally located east of I4, west of North Mills Avenue and south of Westchester Avenue and north of East New Hampshire Street. Amending the development conditions of the plan development, providing a conforming legal description, providing for severability, correction of scrier's errors, permit disclaimer, and an
effective date. >> Move approval. >> Motion by Commissioner Chapen. >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Burns. I don't have any requests for public input, discussion hearing. None. All in favor of the motion indicates. So by saying I
I those opposed. Motion carries. Okay. We're going to skip without objection to item 13D. Ordinance number 2026-20, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Orlando, Florida, amending the city's adopted growth management plan future land use sub element future land use
element sub area policy LU.S.2.5 2.5 to increase the residential unit allowance units within the sub area policy boundary south of Oglesby Avenue west of Clay Street north of East Par Street and east of Interstate 4 providing for severability correction
scrier's errors and an effective date >> motion by Commissioner Chapen >> second by Commissioner Rose I have no request for public input discussion hearing none in favor of the motion indicates So by saying I I opposed. So
motion carries. Okay. That leaves us with 13 C and 13E which are ordinances 202619 and 20 2621. And we also have a legislative appeal
and a quasi judicial hearing which all relate to the same property which is 1600 Aaron Avenue. So, it's a little complicated, but we have to take care of the legislative appeal before we can
vote on 202619. And then we have to dispense with both of those before we can go to the quasi judicial hearing. And we have to do the quasi judicial hearing before we can vote on the ordinance, which is 2621.
So, what I'm going to do is have the clerk read uh 2619 and open the public hearing and then we will hear the legislative appeal that relates to that particular ordinance at the same time so that any testimony um
that we have will be u part of the record for both the hearing of the ordinance as well as the appeal. Everybody good on that? >> I have a question. So, the appellant >> can you unmute? >> Unmute your device. >> The appellant gets to speak during the
public hearing. Is that the way we're doing this? >> Because they get to do a 10-minute I thought the when an appeal they get to city gets to do 10-minute the >> We have to do the appeal >> first. >> Okay. Before reading the ordinance, that's what I'm asking. >> We're going to read the ordinance and
leave that open and go to the appeal. But any conversation that's had will be reflected in the record of both. >> Okay. Thank you. And we'll have to vote separately. We'll have to vote on the appeal first and then vote on the ordinance. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Would you read the ordinance? >> Ordinance number
>> is that right, Jody? >> I don't know why these fly. >> Ordinance number 2026-9. An ordinance of the city council of the city of Orlando, Florida. Amending the city's growth management plan to change the future land use map designation for certain land generally located west of
Aaron Avenue east of South Ivy Lane north of Casia Street and south of Sepa Street and comprised of 4.2 acres of land more or less from public recreation and instit and institutional to residential low intensity providing for amendment of the city's growth management plan providing for
separability correction of scrier's errors and an effective date. >> Okay. And we are now going to take up item 15A, which is the legislative appeal relating to the ordinance that is before us. Um,
at its meeting on February 17th, 2026, the MPP considered the proposed amendment to the growth management plan to amend the GMP future land use map designation for the property located at 1600 Aaron Avenue from public recreation and institutional
to residential low intensity. After conducting a public hearing, the MPB recommended approval of the proposed GMP amendment. Section 2.179 of the Orlando City Code gives the appellant and the city staff each 10 minutes to present
their case, and then we will move to um well, let's begin with uh Jason Burton, our planning manager, and then we'll go to the appellants. Jason, >> good evening, Mr. Mayor and commissioners. My name is Jason Burton. I lead the city planning division. We're
here to talk today about two separate issues. The first is a legislative appeal. The second one will be coming up later is a quasi judicial appeal. The legislative appeal is only about this case number for the growth management plan to change the future land use
designation from a p public designation to a residential low designation and only that. Subsequently, we'll be talking about a quasi judicial appeal regarding a proposed church on that particular property. So, let me go
through this. The location is at 1600 Aaron Avenue, which is over by Casia Street, South Alvie Lane, Aaron Avenue, and South of Columbia Street. It's 4.2 acres in District 6. The recommended action is changing the designation of
the property on the future land use map from public recreation institutional called PRI for short public on the zoning map actually to residential low inensity which is res low on the future land use map.
There's an associate case like I mentioned regarding the former quest site to be turned into community assembly public benefit use or a church that will be heard separately after this item depending on the outcome. So the previous actions on this particular site
include in December 2023 a proposal to reszone and growth management plan change amendment and a conditional I will thanks conditional use permit amendment to convert the former quest site into a 200 seat neighborhood public benefit use and it was deferred at the
MPP meeting by the applicant due to neighborhood concerns in January and February. additional deferrals by the applicant and it was eventually withdrawn in 2025. And then there was a new application received to change to to change from
public recreation institutional to residential low and then a PD resoning for a multi-phase three phases actually maximum 500 seat church on a collector of two lanes. In January 20th, 2026, the
MPP considered the case and voted to defer the request to the February meeting so additional public meetings could be held by the applicant. Um, in February 17th, the MPP recommended approval of the cases
limiting the church to phase one only for approval, not to exceed 200 seats, which is generally a byite use in residential areas. On February 20th, 2026, appellants filed a timely appeal. There was a quasi judicial hearing with
an independent hearing officer on April 23rd, 2026. On May 13th, the hearing officer recommended an order on that QJ quasy judicial appeal. June 22nd, the city council cons will concurrently consider
the QJ appear for this um zoning portion separately after this action. And so this is a future land use map of the area. Here you have public recreational institutional. There's a school to the north, but surrounding this site there's residential low. It's surrounded by a
neighborhood. The proposal is to match the remainder of the neighborhood surrounding it with the residential low um future land use designation. Here's an aerial of subject property. You can see the neighborhood generally around it. Here's some site photos of the
former Quest facility that you can see here. Now, a little bit about the public recreational institutional designation. It's specifically set aside for publiclyowned properties. This this particular property is owned
by a private individual. What happens during the process is there is no maximum intensity or minimum intensity for either non-residential or residential allowances on the property for development. Um but the allowable uses are public recreational
institutional uses and it's usually exclusively reserved for publiclyowned properties on each publiclyowned property that has these designations and has the conforming public zoning district on the property. a conditional
use permit is processed where we define the development standards on any particular property just to let you know. So what's proposed here is a residential low designation which has a maximum intensity of 12 units the acre
or.3 F for non-residential uses. There is no minimum intensity. Now the allowable uses on this um designation include residential uses as well as public recreation and other institutional uses such as a church
that's being proposed subsequently on the quasi judicial appeal. A couple notes of the legislative appeal. The future land use change to the map is a legislative matter. In other words, it's a policy setting
action that the council has more discretion. But I'm going to go explain the nuances of that shortly. And it's conducted according to the standard public hearing procedure. So we'll hear the appeal as well as the public hearing items simultaneously. The quasi judicial
appeal has to be heard separately from the ordinance reading which we'll go over later on. And there's reasons for that because of how we how this is handled within the city the city's code. Um couple of the findings is that this
is consistent with the state comprehensive plan, the east central Florida comprehensive regional policy plans and Florida statutes. Essentially the future land use amendment is consistent with the objective goals and policies of the adopted growth management plan particularly the land
use figures and the proposed future land use amendment is consistent sound res surrounding residential lowintensity future land use pattern. In other words, the neighbors have the same rights as what is proposed for this particular
properties. Now, the necessary public facilities will be adequate to serve the proposed use and will be provided as a condition of approval. Of note, the city cannot require a privatelyowned property remain designated as public PRI as I
described as it is reserved for publicly owned properties. The residential low future land use designation is the least intensive designation and matches the surroundings. So out of all of our future land use designations, this is
the least intensive of them all. Now the actions required by the count council, you can approve or deny the legislative appeal. If approved, the GMP amendment will not become effective if you approve the appeal. It's a little bit backwards. If denied, the council would also vote
on the associated ordinance that is a separate item on the agenda, but we're hearing it today simultaneously as one item. The staff recommendation is deny the legislative appeal and accept the recommendations on this item from the meeting minutes of the February 7th,
2026 municipal planning board. Um, next steps, there should be the first reading of the ordinance. On today's agenda, staff will schedule second reading adoption for hearing of the ordinance which would be at the next city council meeting and we'll send it to the Florida Department of Commerce if not challenged
by the Florida Department of Commerce. It would become effective within 31 days after adoption. Do you have any questions for me? And certainly the appellants are here and of course we can take up the matters with the public hearing simultaneously for this particular item.
We would we would hear both the appeal as well as the ordinance public comment simultaneously with this item. >> Okay. Then we were going to hear we're going to hear from the appellants and I have listed as appellent Cynthia Harris, Bessie Harris,
Sam Brown, Andre Howard, Keith Johnson and dear Dr. Dear sorry Dr. Sweetie Stewart. Um, it turns out that under our procedures, each of the appellants has 10 minutes. So that means you have up to
an hour, but >> 10 minutes a piece. Who's going to speak? >> You guys have a No, not the public. The appellants. Anybody that I just called your name,
would you raise your hand? Cynthia. So, do you have a spokesman for your group? Whoever's going to speak, come on up to the podium. That's That's >> not mine.
>> The other pictures, they're in here. These pictures a while ago >> you Well, actually, you can show the video. They can look at this. >> I call those older that's missing.
>> So, I have >> Hey, Cynthia, could you tell us what the plan is? >> I'm sorry. >> Could you tell us what your plan on presentation is? >> Uh, my presentation is a video. >> No, you're going to speak. Is anybody else going to speak? Um, I believe I'm
going to speak for the apparel >> for the group. Okay. Right. >> Okay. Some of these are missing. So, I have to >> Mayor does that mean she gets 50 minutes? >> 10. >> If it can't be said in 10, I I was just
I was just questioning. >> Do you want me to make it shorter? >> I want you to take the time you need. But if we had five people, each one of you would have gotten 10 minutes. That's why I asked that question. >> Correct. We're collectively as a group, they can yield their time to me. Correct.
>> I find that generally it's looked on more favorably if you don't use an hour to do that. Okay. Yeah, you play the video because it it it takes up the
>> um some of the um folders that you have are missing some pictures. I I do have them here. We were trying to put the files together. So, um you probably some of you may not have pictures a set of pictures in your
folder, but I do have them. They were they were submitted earlier. >> Yeah, you can go ahead and click. >> Are we ready to begin? >> Ready. Good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners. I'm Cynthia Harris, and I appear on behalf of the residents directly
impacted by the proposed resentment of 1600 Avenue. As you can see in the video, this was the day after Hurricane Ian on September 28th, 2022. Before beginning, petitioners request
that all exhibits, affidavit, testimony, hearing transcripts, audio recordings, video recordings, staff reports, exceptions filed with the council, and all materials submitted in these proceedings be preserved as part of the official record.
We also preserve all objections to previously raised during the quas judicial hearing because this request is not opposition to religion. It is not in opposition to a church. This request is about whether this particular location
is appropriate and safe for this use. Issue number one, the city owned staff report shows that this site does not meet normal location standards. commissioners. The city owned staff report states that community assembly
public benefit users normally require access from a four-lane collector roadway or artilleria street because larger ch churches generate higher traffic. That'll be found in page four and paragraph five of the staff report.
The report further acknowledges that this property is only 4.2 2 acres is located on Aaron Avenue. It is not served by a collector roadway. It is not served by arterial roadway and the city
is not applying to its normal standards. Instead, the city staff is asking you to recre to create an exception through a plan development. The question becomes, why should this neighborhood absorb impacts that the city's own code was
designed to protect? Event staff recognize community opposition. The staff addendum confirms that multiple additional community meetings were held after the January hearing. The report specifically states most
attendees at the additional community meetings expressed continued nonsup support of the proposed religious site. Page one, paragraph 4. Despite that overwhelming opposition, the recommendation remained approval. The
residents were heard but were not listened to. Issue number three, as evidenced in the video, the petitioner's exception filed with the city council explains that engineering testimony, flood exhibits, drainage basin analysis,
and resident testimony regarding Hurricane Ian flooding was discounted as speculative. Our engineer testified, residents testified, flood exhibits were submitted. The recommend order never
adequately explains why engineering concerns were rejected, whether drainage capacity was independently evaluated, whether cumulative basin impacts were analyzed. If those questions remain unanswered,
approval is premature. Issue number four, the traffic findings relied on general assumptions. The exceptions filed with the council identified testimony regarding existing congestion, nearby churches, funeral
traffic, residential street limitations, parking overflow concerns. The neighborhood experiences these conditions now. The proposed church will increase intensity of use. The traffic witness relied heavily on a study she
did not prepare and did not personally conduct. Residents live in these conditions every day. Their testimony deserves weight. Emergency access remains unresolved. The record contains testimony from
Ruthie Simon, former law enforcement officers, residents adjacent to access route. The concerns are simple. Ivy Lane is a narrow residential roadway. It is effectively a dead end neighborhood
street. Residents park there. Children walk there. Emergency vehicles must use it. No reliable enforcement mechanism was presented preventing routine church traffic from using the so-called emergency access route. The recommended
order does not meaningfully analyze enforcability. That issue remains unresolved. Health impacts on residents were not addressed. Bessie Harris, a cancer survivor who lives directly across from the proposed site, testified regarding
concerns involving construction dust, diesel emissions, vehicle emissions, increased traffic impacts. No health impact analysis exists in the record. No air quality study exists in the record.
No evidence was presented demonstrating that nearby residents will not be adversely affected. Questions regarding professional qualifications. The application was submitted on behalf of the church by Joseé Venegas. The
recommended order notes that Mr. Venegas filed the application. Petitioners presented information indicated that Mr. Venegas is not a licensed architect in Florida. We're not asking the council to make a finding a wrongdoing. We are
asking the council to consider what weight should be given to design and planning opinions offered by individuals who do not hold a Florida architect license. That question remains unanswered. The city is already prepared to adopt
the recommended order. The proposed final order before council simply adopts hearing officer Frederick Reed's recommended order. That means the concerns raised by residents will effectively be rejected. Commissioners are the final decision makers. You are
not required to simply rubber stamp the recommendation. You have the authority to reject it. The city own reports admits the site is not a collector road. The site is not an arterial road. The proposal seeks a
community level church. Residents overwhelmingly oppose the project. The record contains engineering testimony, law enforcement testimony, resident testimony, flood evidence, traffic evidence, emergency access concerns.
Yet, the recommended order dismisses those concerns while relying primarily on staff conclusions. The burden belongs to the applicant, not the residents. The applicants have not proven that flooding would not worsen. Traffic impacts are adequately
mitigated, emergency access will remain reliable, public safety will be protected. For those reasons, we respectfully request that the city council reject the recommended order, deny the resoning application, and
protect the residents of Richmond Heights and the surrounding community. Finally, the presitioners specifically preserve all objections, testimony, affidavit, exhibits, exception, evidential objections, legal arguments,
transcripts, recordings, and all materials submitted throughout these procedures for purposes of judicial review, including any petition for writ. Thank you, >> Commissioner Rose. Um, we're going to
hear from the public as part of this. Did you want to wait? >> I was addressing. >> Okay. Why don't you go ahead and do that while she's up there? >> Corey, I have a question. Um, the funds that we receive from Orange County for the drain wells as well as the funds
that we're receiving from the federal government, will that help with some of the drainage that was presented in the video and presentation today? Yeah. So that and then the ones that were >> Cory identify yourself for the record. >> Cory Knight, public works director here
for the city. Um commissioner the the funds that we have um depending upon what they are go to various amount of projects. The flooding if I'm correct in this video and I'm not I I can't tell you where this video when it was taken but if it was taken from Ian that was a
historic you know we all know that was historic. And so what we look at, so the funds that are going to go going to go to some of these projects go to a myriad of different projects back in in this area among others. But there will be some um um there will be some benefit to
those to this project in the general. Although I can't get down to the level to say it's going to absolutely help that specific video evidence of what's going >> I just want to make sure the the funds can will help because I know some of it is five six and we shared that we share
Raleigh Street and so if the mitigation that we are doing is going to help some of the drainage that was specifically displayed. I just want to make sure cuz that was a big part of I and you didn't get the packet and that was a big part but it was like a followup to the video that was displayed on the screen showing the drain basins and the the drainage in
the area and the flooding. So I just wanted to make sure >> it it will ultimately the goal here is to and and there's a there's a there's several different grants that we are going after as well to to try to help with some of these two. So I can't get deep in the weeds about which which area
specifically which grant is going to but in general a lot of them are focused in that area. >> Okay. Thank you. >> The drain basin photos are from FEMA. >> You also may want to hear from the applicant. This is the legislative
appeal portion not considering the recommended order from the hearing officer. >> Jason, I I was just inquiring about hearing from the applicant. Do the does the applicant want to speak? >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Good afternoon, Mayor Councilman.
I guess point of distinction this first part of the hearing. >> Could you identify yourself? >> Sure. I'm sorry. Anna Long. I'm with the law firm of Dean Meade, 420 South Orange Avenue, Sweet 700, Orlando, Florida 32821.
I'm here representing the applicant. Um, the first part of this hearing is simply for the change in the land use. So that's why it's the legislative portion of the hearing and it's only to take it from what is currently
designated a public institutional use to the residential low use and is as staff said the lowest intensity use. Without that, regardless of whom owns the property or what they might want to do on the property, there is no valid use
for the property because the owners are private, not public. The second part of the hearing where we assumed was going to go in order would be then the um appeal to the hearing officer with respect to the reszoning which was going
from res low if you approve it to zoning of a PUD. So from that perspective I almost want to hear the rest of the story um because we do agree with staff recommendations. We do agree with the MPB as conditioned
and there's several conditions. Probably the most important for your decision- making today is the decision today, assuming you approve the growth management change to the underlying land use, excuse me. Then the reasonzoning is yes to a PUD, but not to a 500 seat
church. It's to a 200 seat neighborhood church. Phase one only. that's all you're approving because the MPB conditioned their recommendation for approval that if anything more than a 200 seat church was to come before them
again, it had to come back to you again. And with respect to the concerns that the citizens have, and they're valid concerns, it's too soon in the process because final transportation studies are
done upon submittal of site plans. Final storm water designs are submitted by the applicant once we submit to the water management district and your local storm water utility folks. We're not there yet. We're simply asking for underlying
land use change so the private entity can make use of the property and a PUD at the lowest level of a phase one for a 200 seat neighborhood church. With that, in respect of your time and for others that want to speak, I would just simply
ask to reserve rebuttal time at the end. >> Commissioner Burns, did you want to speak now or? >> Uh, yes. I wanted to offer a motion and I want to offer a motion to approve the appeal uh that was presented.
>> Okay. We still need to hear from the public. >> Okay. >> On this one, I have two requests. Sammy Brown, which is one of the appellants, right? Do you want to speak?
And then Lana Gellzer. Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, commissioners. I'm Sammy Brown. Been a resident of Orlando over 60 years. Resident for 50ome years. I live at 1649
Arend across the street from the from the assembly there and they want to go to uh 220 member they want to change the zoning but all of this is to finally get them to a 500 member church whatever
assembly and uh we are thinking about this thing as a I don't know but they're going to be able to operate 24 hours a day seven days a week so we're going to have to put up with people coming in. It's only one way in, one way out of that facility. So, we're going to have
to put up with the staff, the membership coming in and going 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. You also got to put up with delivery trucks coming and going five to six days a week. And now when they get that thing built to page two and three
going up to a two-story building, all of a single building, all of the single residence, single building, residence, single single garage. And this thing is I thought zoning protect the character of a neighborhood. But you guys are just passing everything this [clears throat]
assembly want just rubber stamping. And they want to get to a five. I'm I'm I'm going feel like I'm going to be caught between two mega churches, between First Baptist and the Brazilian church if this thing is approved. And I mean that's within a half a mile. Two mega churches.
And I I just think it feel like the city turned it back on the residents. U you know, we have no space. [clears throat] And if you ever seen the the intensity of First Baptist, when people coming to
pick up their kids from school, nursery, that intensity is going to be shifted to us too down Sepa, down Booker, um all these streets. That's a that's we we a two-lane residential road 25 miles
an hour speed bumps and you want to put an assembly this size in our neighborhood. I just don't think it's right. I mean the 220 we I think we can barely tolerate the 220 assembly but going up to 600 or 500 membership is a
bit much to ask for our community itself. And I think you ought to reject that zoning because that's just the first step to them going to the 500 membership. And you know that's a lot to ask for us. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Lana Gellzer. >> We're on three minutes. >> [cough] [clears throat] >> This is a bit confusing today right here. >> Yeah, it is. >> Lana Gellz at 815 Hill Street.
First of all, I want to applaud everybody who showed up to city council today. It was a proud day for me to see civic engagement, to see the community understand that they do have a voice. And I want them to say don't give up on
your voice. I want you to understand this process starts now. Don't let up. Notification for anybody should not be just 300 ft. We used to be a th00and then it went to
500 300 feet. I'm telling about the process cuz I've been through this process six times. I remember when we fought for our national protected wetlands over on WD
judge the city of Orlando used $435,000 mitigated credits hire an attorney to fact the taxpayers the people be prepared for that my brothers and sisters is coming I remember the soccer stadium my mother my
late mother and I f did went through this process says, "No transportation impact study was done. No true environmental study was done. You closed the road without understanding the
impact." What you're hearing is what will be the impact of the community. You say phase one, but we just witnessed what happened when somebody gets five days, but when the city staff does whatever they want to to prepare you to
vote against the people. All we saying is the process is always stacked against the citizens. We will be back for phase two. But sometimes, no, your past history has indicated we
need to be very vigilant cuz once this door is open, what would happen when they want to go to 500 seat on a two-lane highway? I say this, but Dr. Wanda Jones,
we fought five years. Don't give up. Don't quit. There's not the proper studies, especially not the environment studies because guess what? I'll be on your team for the air quality. I'm moving the
monitor collecting the data. We will have the data that the EPA will certify about what's about to happen. But remember, this is back it up on the wetlands. You can do all you want to do when you talk about flooding, but manmade flooding is what we're dealing
with. When you remove trees, when you do a lot of things, this is man-made. This is not a 500year flooding. This is caused by you're doing the wrong thing in communities. All I'm saying is treat us all the same, apply the law equally, but give the community a voice and
saying this is not what we want in our community. Thank you. [applause] >> Okay, Commissioner Burns. Uh [clears throat] yes, uh mayor and uh fellow council members, um I I have been
involved with uh this project um dating back to 2003. And so in 2003, I was approached by the the owners uh and they talked about a uh building the church. Uh and so had a couple of
meetings um and then there was a lot of there was a lot of um there there was no support for the community. There was a lot of questions a lot on the design and just the intensity and so the owners pulled
their application uh only to come back and now request a 500 seat facility. And uh that's when I my support and confidence in this applicant started to
erode because I did not feel that what was being presented to the community was what the applicant ultimately wanted. All right. And when we talk about bringing development into communities, we have to work with the community and
not do things to the community. And it it was clear to me that there was uh a shift from listening to the community to trying to push through something. I don't know if they got guidance from the city, but trying to push through something that was much more intense. Um
and so where I stand now, I I don't support this uh intensity. And what I would like to offer uh is a a motion to approve the appeal uh as it was stated. Well, also, mayor, I wanted to add to
and and this was something that rubbed me the wrong way when I was getting briefed on this item. Uh, it was mentioned that the um the attorneys for the applicant stated that they plan to sue the city if this didn't go through.
All right. And I'm not sure if my other fellow commissioners was mentioned that was mentioned to you, but I I found that very difficult for me because what they were mentioning was I I attended the municipal planning board and I made a
statement asking the municipal planning board to uh postpone uh or continue this for the applicant and the community to have more discussion. the municipal planning board decided to do that, went back and it was
more discussion. So, they were implying that um I stood in or or had undo influence on the municipal planning board and that if this didn't go through that they would sue the city and I just did not appreciate uh the threats uh
that I feel I received it as a threat. I'm not sure if you all receive that information as a threat as well. So again, uh, I'd like to make, uh, a motion to approve the appeal. >> Hey Jason, >> I I have a question.
>> Yeah, Jason or one of the lawyers, whatever's doing. >> So the question is, what exactly is the appeal? Because from my understanding, municipal planning board approved a reduction to the 200 seats. >> Hold on. >> You guys are on the legislative appeal.
All that we're dealing with right now is whether this site should be have a future land use designation of public a public recreational institution or PRI for short and they're asking for residential low future land use designation. The PD resoning the church
is not before you right now. All that they are asking is that there be the same future land use designation as their neighbors to the south, east, and west, not the church. So, we're not
considering the recommended order at this time. >> Right. And and I and I understand and I I I followed that. Um but also when you when someone purchas a property they know what zoning that they >> and they a city cannot use its
regulatory regulatory land use and zoning to take old value away of a of a property for a private land owner. It could be a regulatory taking or like a de facto eminent domain of the property if you force it to keep as a public
piece of property because then you basically eminent domain the property. So that could could expose this council to some serious legal consequences. >> So Commissioner Burns, I don't know if you're going to get there. I don't know
where the votes are, >> but I think the better approach is to let the legislative appeal um stand as um and let the uh underlying land use changed to private and then take your
argument on the quasi judicial. >> You might want to talk on the quasi. >> Does that sound right, Jody? >> Yes, sir. >> So, do we So, where are we with I guess there? So my recommendation would be to
deny the legislative appeal and improve the actions of the MPB and then let Commissioner Burns make the fight that he wants to make on the quasi judicial appeal. Jason, does that sound right?
Okay. So would you >> I have a question. >> Commissioner, you good with that? >> Yes. >> But I have a question. So all all this is doing is changing the land use from public recreational institutional to residential which would be consistent with what surrounds it. Correct. >> Correct. >> That's fine.
>> That's step one. >> That's right. >> Okay. Then I'll make that motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. Further discussion hearing. None. All in favor of motion to deny the legislative appeal and approve the
actions of the MPB indicate so by saying I. I. Those opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Now we are on the quasi judicial. >> Oh, you're right. Okay. And I move that we adopt
uh what was the number on the ordinance? >> Ordinance number 2026-9. >> Okay. I move to adopt whatever ordinance. Stephanie, read it again, Stephanie. >> 2026-9. >> Okay. Okay. Is there a second? >> Motion and a second. All in favor
indicates so by saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed. Okay. We have the underlying land use approved. Well, first reading anyways. Now, let's talk about quasi judicial which is where the rubber meets the road.
>> Greetings again, commissioners and mayor. This is Jason Burton with the city planning division. We're going to talk about the quasi judicial appeal which is the PD resoning to accommodate a church on this particular property. Again, this is the site in the middle of
a neighborhood at 1600 Aaron Avenue within Richmond Heights neighborhood. It's 4.2 acres in District 6. The requested action is a plan development reszoning to convert the former Quest site which used to be a hospital before
that for crippled children a long time ago to community assembly public benefit use or a church that has no greater than 200 congregants. The associate cases was what you just voted on which is changing the future land use designation from
public recreational institutional to residential low. Again, here's the zoning map. today. It is zone P for public and it's proposed to be a PD. Um, previous actions, I'll go over this. Um,
Quest ceased on this site at in 2022. The properties purchased by the current owners in 2023. Um, in December 2023 and um in 2024, there were actions to reszone this particular property as well
as the associated growth management plan amendment. Those were ultimately withdrawn in 2025 and in 2025 in November there was a new application received to reszone this particular property as well as change
the future land use designation. Now this this action before you is the second item here which is zoning 2025 110. It's the plan development reszoning for a multi-phase maximum 500 seat church
community assembly public benefit use on a collector of two lanes. Ultimately, the municipal planning board, the city staff recommended half of that so it could be reused existing buildings that were on the site for a 250 seat church.
The planning board disagree with that recommendation from the staff and adopted a motion to accommodate a 200 seat person church and I'll explain why. So you heard it was opened at January 20
20th 26 MP considered the case. They deferred it for additional public meetings to be held by the applicant. Um in February they recommended approval of the cases but limited the church the phase one only which is the reuses of
the existing buildings and not to exceed 200 seats which is a byright use that doesn't require any special consideration from the council or PD. It's just that since they applied for 500 seat church they had to apply for a
PD. were acting on a different recommendation than what was applied to at the beginning. There was a timely appeal applied on February 20th by the appellants. There was a quasi judicial hearing for the PD resoning was conducted. The hearing officer issued a
recommended order on May 13th. And today we're considering both the legislative appeal for the GMP portion that was just previous and now we're hearing the quasitional matter. This is the site plan for phase one, which is reuse of the existing buildings. There's no new
additional development on the property because there was three phases on the international application, but those were rejected by the municipal planning board and only phase one reuse of the building for a 200 congregant um church
was provided. You don't have to be on a collector road for up to 200 congregants per our code. If you go over 200 congregants, then you need to be on a collector road of four lanes or greater.
So we allow churches inside a residential zoning districts for up to 200 congregants. So the current site is zone P. The P designation is limited to public benefit uses and can only be applied to properties owned by public
bodies. So this is owned by a private individual. the and like I mentioned earlier it's a potential regulatory taking if the city required a privately held property remain public reszonings and applications are quasi judicial
matters they implement policy and have to be conducted subject to the Florida Supreme Court ruling in Breard versus Snyder and folks that are dissatisfied are entitled to a quasi judicial board recommendation denov hearing before a
hearing officer That hearing occurred on April 23rd. The QJ hearing was conducted. Um, some findings by the hearing officers. Under federal law, religious land uses, it's called the Raal Lupa
law, significantly limits a local government's ability to deny religious land uses through zoning and land development regulations. Under Alupa, municipalities may not impose or implement land use regulation regulations that place a substantial
burden on religious exercise unless the action is supported by compelling government interest and is the least restrictive means of achieving that interest. I'll give you an example. If you raise traffic concerns, that could be an a a concern of the neighborhood,
but you couldn't deny something based on exclusively traffic concerns. The least restrictive means of doing that would be like moving the access points to an intersection which was incorporated into the recommendation by the staff and ultimately recommended by the municipal
planning board. Now this is important while petitions petitioners expressing neighborhood concerns is an important component of the review process. Opposition alone per federal law does not constitute a legally defensive basis for denial. Any conditions or
limitations imposed must be directly related to mitigating identifiable land uses such as traffic, parking or operational intensity and must be applied in a neutral non-discriminatory manner consistent with federal law. In other words, there was a secular use on
this particular site. In in other words, you should be able to approve a religious use on this site simultaneously. In this instance, the city's zoning regulations expressly permit religious congregations of up to 200 persons within residential zoning districts when they're not located on a major thorough
affair. Aside from the release relief of minimum lot size and vehicle access, which is not part of the application because that would be a future phase that has not been approved. Um the proposed PD complies with all
aspects of the land development code. So there's not any variances or anything proposed in this PD since they're being limited to 200 congregants which is allowed by right inside of residential zoning districts. The QJ officer also found that competent
substantial evidence was produced to demonstrate the request is consistent with all applicable requirements of the city's land development code and growth management plan. The hearing officer found that the petitioners did not present any competent substantial evidence to establish that the request
is inconsistent with the applicable requirements of the land development code and growth management plan. In other words, there's no additional flooding when you reuse existing parking lots and existing buildings as part of the phase one approval.
Therefore, the hearing officer recommended that the approval of this zoning that limits the congregation to 200 persons and only the existing bail links reuse is consistent and is is is and he recommends approval consistent
with the February 2026 MPB recommendation. There are actions required by the council. You have to approve or deny the hearing officer's recommendations for this particular quasi judicial appeal and you can only deal with the recommended order at this
point in time. If approved, the council should vote on the associated PD zoning as a separate item from this hearing. So, you will only be hearing as part of this portion from the appellants and not the public. If denied, PD resoning
cannot be approved. The site remains zoned for public use, if you will. And the staff recommendation is approve of the hearing officer's recommendation of denial for the quasi judicial appeal and accept the recommendation for this item for the meeting minutes of the
February 17th municipal planning board. You have any questions for me? >> Okay, questions. Commissioner Burns. >> So, um Jason, so this quasi judicial is is not is it it's associated with moving it to R1 or No.
>> No. It's public p public and it's proposed for PD for the church. Now plan development zonings are what you see is what you get type of a zoning a customized zoning district. So it it would have a base zoning of R1 because
it's consistent with the future land use designation, but it would be PD to accommodate a church for the existing phase one plan for the reuse of the existing buildings only for up to 200 congregants. In the future, should the
church expand is a whole new and separate issue that would come back for a new application and come before the municipal planning board, get a recommendation and come before the council which could be denied or or you know would be the pleasure of the council at that point in time.
>> Okay. because uh as I look I I I believe that this does not conform with our current um LDC uh because per LDC chapter 58 part 4L public benefit uses they're design they're divided in three
assembly light intensive um but also they have subcategories those subcategories being local neighborhood community and regional and are we saying that this we're seek They're seeking approval under the neighborhood.
>> Yes. So 200 or lower is by right. 200 above would be community which would at that point in time be >> required. Let me finish. So we're going under the neighborhood. Correct. Our our land development code under neighborhood says an assembly public benefit use that
is designed for and intended to serve the residents of a neighborhood or small geographic area approximately one square mile and meeting the following standards. All
right. So that to me reads that they can come under this neighborhood if the project was planned and designed to serve the immediate community around around the facility. And that's what it states. Am I
>> that's the intent of the code. However, Commissioner with any religious use, we cannot pick the congregants. That would be constitutionally suspect. >> Yeah. I'm not saying picking the congregants. All right. I'm going off of the land development code that we're bringing this under. All right. It says
the project I'll read it again. >> Project that is designed for and intended to serve the residents of a neighborhood or small geographic area. So to me that that that reads as if this facility was being established to serve
that immediate community. And the question I think that has not been asked by staff, the municipal planning board is the question is was this designed for and intended to serve the residents of a
neighborhood or a small geographic area approximately one square mile. We'll have to have the applicant answer that question. But again, the city staff and the council can't pick the congregants and who they serve. >> And I'm not I'm not saying that we are.
All right. But this I'm I'm reading what the code says. Correct. >> Designed for and intended to serve. >> Correct. >> All right. That's the proposing to serve congregants from the local community and around the area. Now, how big that is?
>> It It says approximately one square mile. >> We'll have to ask the applicant to answer that question. >> Sure. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Commissioner Sheen. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um I I think the concern here is that, you know, if we if
we can't say no to 200, how do you restrict it to 200? because if they keep talking about this phasing and it it's not fair of the neighborhood that we pass this for 200 and then they can come back and ask for se subsequent phases.
That's not fair for them. So I'm what my concern is this phasing stuff if they can say well we're going to cap it at 200 the neighborhood might not be as concerned I don't I don't speak for them but as they would if this potential phasing up to 500 which I've heard them express.
>> Correct. So the recommended order as well as the recommendation for the PL planning board is to cap it at 200 and subsequent phases are not approved. >> Okay. So it is capped at 200. >> Correct. >> Through this >> correct through the plan development
reszoning. Got that correct? >> And how that is that enforced that's the question. >> That's enforced when we review their permits. We look at their occupancy and things like that through the permitting process. And mind you, all that's approved with the first phase is reuse
of existing buildings, not subsequent phases, not new buildings, or not higher occupancies. >> Okay, we're going to do this at least procedurally. Oh, Commissioner Chape >> questions.
>> I do think it's important that >> I was. It just wasn't on. [laughter] I do think it's important that we all realize and hear this 200 person limit and whether or not they can come back. Uh churches these days are operating
more and more like businesses, more seven days a week, child care, bingo, Sunday worship, etc. But what I'm hearing is we don't really have any wiggle room on denying any specific
church this by right 200. But I think we're pretty clear on the 200. So they can come back and ask and we can't keep them from doing that. But or can we? >> Well, you can >> I mean they can come back and ask and
they can get denied. Will we still be in the same predicament as we are in this? I don't mean to say that negatively. To to answer your question, Commissioner, you can't in land use law, you can't prevent somebody from applying in the future, but certainly I feel like we
can't I feel like on this first one, like we're really a bad spot, >> a plan development, but a spot where we have to >> by right they have some rights. >> Correct. >> And the next one, are we going to hear that sorry by right they can do it again or are we going to hear that it's going
to be more planning instruments? It would not be a by ride approval. That would be a larger approval than the buy ride if it goes under. >> And then you get into parking and storm water and access and egress and hours of operation, etc.
>> Correct. >> Okay. Oops. >> Okay. We're going to at least do this procedurally, right? So, we're going to give 10 minutes to the petitioners divided among all of them and then 10 minutes to the applicant. So
>> it would be for QJ. I believe it's I think it's five minutes during the quasi judicial for the appellants as well as the applicant and no public testimony until you get >> I know no public testimony actually we've already heard from both. So five
minutes should be sufficient. >> All right applicants I'm sorry petitioners you're up five minutes. Cynthia, you speaking for the petitioners again? I think you pretty much made your arguments during the
legislative appeal. [cough and clears throat] the concerns that were addressed earlier. I reiterate that those things. However, as been stated before, the same energy you had when it came to the historical
preservation, it applies to our communities as well. If you know the history of Richmond Heights, all of those streets are named after somebody famous. Cash's Clay, King Cole,
Willie Mays. These are streets that also have historic preservation and value to us. And as you saw in the video, that was that aerial video was taken the day after Ian. people were underwater
and there's nothing that says in in their petition or any type of assurance that that won't happen again. They're already operating in that church. They're already operating. They already have activity and their proposals is in
the future land use is to put a big old soccer stadium in the middle of 4.2 2 acres of land as well as increase their capacity up to 800 people. 200 may be the cap right now, but yes,
Commissioner Chapen, you're in the same predicament now as you will be then. And that's what I want to reiterate that if you approve this, our voices are not being heard is falling on deaf ears. And the people
that suffer are the people in this community because we already absorb everything. We absorb the homelessness. We absorb the traffic. We have funeral traffic. We have church traffic. Within a two-mile radius, there are 64 churches
already in our community. The most of everybody. And we also have all of the social services in our community. They want to put daycare, but it's not for us. The church is not for us. They their
congregation is spoken in Portuguese. I don't know anybody in this room within a onem or a twom radius that even speak the language. >> You're going down a bad path right now. >> Would it be okay? Would you guys approve it if it was an AM church?
>> No. >> No. Because it's not about religion. Like I said, we already have 64 churches within that radius. It's not about religion. It's about the disruption of a community that's already being
disrupted. Thank you. >> Okay. the applicant. Five minutes >> that you could only speak in the legislative and nobody was signed up but the two I called >> Anna Long, excuse me, Anna Long Deme 420
South Orange Avenue, sweet 700 Orlando, Florida 32801. Before I sum this up very quickly, I do want to say to Commissioner Burns, Commissioner Burns, I wasn't an attorney for the for the applicant during the MPB
in 2003 nor 2004 or 5. I wouldn't have said something like that about you or to you. So, I can't speak to who might have. Um, I don't mind saying when you have a court reporter, we have a court reporter because if it doesn't go our way and we have a legal recourse, we likely will take it. But I just didn't
want you to associate that. I felt like when you said that out loud and everybody looked at me, oh, there she goes. It No, sir. With that said, um, we heard the community and we heard the MPB and
we heard staff. You're not getting 500 seats. You get 200 seats and you use the buildings that you have. We agree. Period. If for whatever reason in the future somebody comes before you to say
we'd like 250 please. We want 300 please. It's go back to go start over. You don't get to go to boardwalk and get a pass. It's not how it works. We won't be doing that. We cannot. We ask you that you re that you approve as we've
asked for the resoning limited to the 200 seats for a neighborhood church utilizing the existing buildings. Therefore, construction costs or excuse me, construction disruption would be limited to interior uh works, etc. And all of those things, all of those things
require permits. Thank you. >> Okay, Commissioner Barnes. >> Yes, I have a question. >> I have a question for the applicant. Uh, and it was the same question that I posed to uh to Jason that I think the
question has not been asked uh and therefore it has not been answered. Um, was this project designed for and intended to serve the residents of the neighborhood or the
small geographic area within one square mile. It is my understanding It is my understanding that several members of this current congregation are live are live within an area close to this proximity. Do they all live within a mile? No.
>> Okay. So, I just want to answer my question. Was this designed and intended to serve the residents of a neighborhood within this small geographical area that our code states one square mile? No,
>> thank you. >> Excuse me. I'm sorry. The pastor is here. He'd like to speak to that. >> So, I would like to speak. Um Ryan Amos, vice president for the Florida Conference Association. We are a 7th Day Adventist church. We serve all nations,
all people, regardless of the language that they speak or the color of their skin or anything that has to do. We serve community services. We're one of the leaders in disaster response, reaching out to communities after disasters. We're one of the leaders in
health care with Advent Health. We serve every member. I don't care who you are. If you need if you walk through my doors and you need help, I will give you that help. And so, yes, we do. We are we have 70,000 members within the state of Florida. We have families that reside
within this area. We serve everyone. And so, yes, if somebody in this community needs help, I'll do it. I have no problem with that. And so, we have a way to reach out. We want to provide services to this community for youth,
for young people, because we know that that's a desperate need. So, yes, we're willing to serve anybody who walks through our doors. And that has been the mission of the 7th Day Adventist Church since its founding in 1844. Thank you. Okay,
mayor. Uh, I did have a question cuz I'm looking at the actions required by the council. Uh, and it says if denied, the PD reszone cannot be approved. Site would remain zone public use. And so I thought our the legislative action that
we took reszoned it to R1. But you're saying if this is denied that zoning wouldn't change. I'm >> the future lus designation would go to res low. The zoning right now
is P public as well too. So you're reszoning it to PD with a default zoning of R1 and then you're approving up to 200 congregants on the site in the phase one reuse of the building. Says it stands today if it's >> approved.
>> Correct. If it's approved and of course this is the hearing officer's recommendation um that you consider and depending on the outcome of this you would have a separate hearing. You read the ordinance and take public comment. Okay, I'm gonna try a motion just to see
where we are. Yep. >> Do we have any more petitioners that would like to speak? >> I thought you were representing all the petitioners. >> Okay. Who else wants to talk? Come on. >> Perfect. >> Let's go.
>> Is there anybody else that is a petitioner, not just the general public? Um, good afternoon, uh, mayor and commissioners. My name is Andre Howard. Uh, my address is 4266 Booker Street, Orlando. And I'm right down the street,
uh, from the Quest Building. But what I want to do is just to address something that was just said because I don't want you all to be misled. Uh, you were just told that they would do anything for us that we wanted. We were invited to their church for
services. Their services are in Portuguese. And be mindful, this is not a church thing, but their services are in Portuguese. I did my research and they're in Portuguese. At one of the meetings, we addressed that and one of
the ladies here told us that we would be given earbuds to translate during their services. I don't want to have to have earbuds to try to listen and miss the service. And
this is what we all talked about at that meeting. I just don't want you all to be misled by what you're being told. Does that make sense? I mean, I just want to clarify that. >> Yes. >> All right. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Are there any other of the five
petitioners that want to speak? [clears throat] Sam Brown again. Uh, I just like to tell the pastor he's welcome, but his door is open, but it's where his door is that we're concerned about. He placed his door right in the middle of a
residential area, right in our front door, our back door, our side door. And then they want to put a soccer field, a basketball court, they want to put school nursery. And I'm thinking, and if they fourlane, if they need a four lane,
how they going to get it? They going to take our right our parkway and make the four lanes for that if they if they apply for the 500. And I'm just saying, I mean, when when does this thing end? I mean, I'm I'm looking at a operation that's going to start at 6:00 in the
morning, not over till like midnight, you know? That's that's the the scope of operation this thing is. That's a that's a that's a big thing, you know, seven days a week, 24 hours a day. And I I'm not knocking the the the facility.
I'm just saying where it is, right in the middle of a neighborhood. It just don't make sense to me. Thank you. >> Any the other petitioners? >> Commissioner Burns. >> Uh yes, Mayor. Um I would like to offer
a motion to deny the uh hearing officer's recommendation. >> Second. >> Hold on. I got a question. >> Commissioner Rose. So the recommend so sorry the
recommendation is to withhold and uphold MPB's recommendation of 200 seats. Am I correct? >> Correct. >> So the original application
as was submitted was for 500 seats. >> Correct. And that was not what was approved. >> Okay. So MPB gave the ruling and said here are the conditions >> correct >> of 200 as a maximum >> correct >> that was approved >> correct >> by MPB
>> correct. >> So then it went to the jud the magistrate for an appeal >> and then the magistrate says MPB board members are accurate because they represent the community by saying cap at
200 seats and no more. Am I correct? >> There was no substantial competent evidence to decide otherwise. And if the council is to go against the hearing order, you'll need to explain why essentially. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> So, the there's a motion and a second on the table to deny the 200. Am I correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And may are we open for discussion? >> Okay. discussion
>> and and I wanted to make it clear um my reason for wanting to deny this again is based on our code um LDC chapter 58 part 4L public benefit use uh in this subset
of the assembly the four categories this one is coming under neighborhood and it clearly states an assembly public business un public benefit uh use that is designed for and intended to serve the residents of a neighborhood or small
geographic area approximately one square mile. So that's the basis of my um my reason for wanting to see this denied. >> Okay. So M. >> So then Okay. So based on what you're saying,
the pastor has gotten up and said there are residents currently that live in this community that will be attending this church. Our code does not define how many people of a community within one mile must be um used. One, two, a
church is a home for everyone. I have walked in to a full Hispanic cathedral. Didn't understand a word that was being said, but I was there because I for the intended purpose. There was a service
that I was attending. um they spoke in a different language and so we're saying the church won't serve the surrounding current demographics. Is that what we're Is that what we're using the code to say?
>> That's not what I'm saying. I'm reading the code as it's written. But a but a church serves the people in the community and the church provides social services in the community regardless of which
community it is. So what we're saying is our code says there's a specific part of the community that's not going to be served by open public church which would have signs and of times that the service would have. were saying that that
doesn't serve the community even though and I'll go a step further that appellant just stated that they are ADA accessible and they're meeting handicap requirements by ensuring that anyone who cannot understand the service as it's
dictated will have microphones. In fact, we just held a postmemorial where we gave out microphones and headphones and earbuds to people who did not understand the native tongue which was English during our postmemorial. We
gave out earbuds to translate to the proper language. So, what we're saying is that our code says that there's a specific group of people not being served, but we can't determine what that group is, even though there
are residents that reside in this community that will potentially come and attend this 7-day Adventist church, regardless of the dialect that they speak. Is that what we're denying on right now? With a motion with a motion and a second on the table. Commissioner Rose, if I I could interrupt.
Commissioner Burns, I don't even see this as a judgment call. It's I don't see us having any legal basis to decide in the manner that you would like. I I don't know if I wish we did or not, but I don't see it see it at all. Anybody within that mile that wants to attend
that church can attend that church, >> right? And and again, I go back to our code and I think the intent of this code on the neighborhood is that if the neighborhood is going to take on the increased traffic burden and everything
else, it should be designed and uh uh designed to meet their need to design and and uh to serve them. That's my that's what I see the intent of this code. If it's limited to neighborhood, the neighborhood, the surrounding
neighborhood will take on more of a burden of what will be happening. And the and because of that, it should be designed to serve that immediate neighborhood or community within that um one square mile. And again, I'm not making this up. I'm looking at the code.
It seems like the MPP dealt with that by limiting it to the 200 >> because it was currently zone as it stands today is zon as it stands today is zoned for 500. So MPB >> No, it's not. >> So is that the current Okay. The current use is 500. Correct.
>> Okay. So the there's a cap at 200 regardless of how So if it was just regular public use, a thousand people could come for congregation if you meet fire and building code. But [clears throat] MPB heard and met people met the the concerns somewhere in the
middle and say cap at 200 which means and I'm going to put this out there on any given day if there are more than 200 there is a violation of the fire code which means you can call code enforcement or 911 and say there is a
violation there are more than 200 cars in this in this parking lot facility And by fire code, there will be a sign that says occupancy maximum load 200. Am I correct? Okay. So, if the residents
say it seems like there's a thousand people in the in the building today because they're having a a a fair, there's a thousand people in the building by right, the residents can call 911. Oh, hold. I I want to make sure I get
this right. By policy and staff can address the concern because they are at occupancy load. That would be correct. Commissioner Sue, it could be it's only limited to a maximum congregations or congregants of 200 persons, which by by the way is the
byite intensity of any residential zoning district within the city, if you will. Now, the intent is that it serves residents within a mile of that site. And like the good pastor said, he does have congregants within a mile of the
site, >> Jody. I'm hesitant to have you weigh in, but do you want to? >> Yeah, mayor. I think unfortunately we're legally constrained or the council is legally constrained in a couple of different ways. one, um, if you don't
approve a a use of this property that, um, a use of the property, you're essentially denying the private property owner the ability to use the property because currently, as you know, with public use, there's no use for the property. So, without some kind of
zoning, um, the we'd have a a bit of a Bert Harris problem. The second thing is that we do have the uh Raulupa Act, the federal law that says you can't treat religious uses differently than you would treat any other use. And this
property has been used uh for a commercial well institutional medical facility use uh with arguably the same issues um in terms of uh land use and traffic. So, I think you have some
significant legal um issues here if it's the desire of the council to turn this. >> Okay. What Jody is saying is we probably lose if we vote this down and they take it to court. That's what I've been dancing around for 30 minutes. And if
they want to go over 200 ever, they can apply to do that, but they have to come right back here to do that and have the same discussion again. So, let me tell you where we are. We're on Commissioner
Burns's motion, seconded by Commissioner Sheen, to deny the hearing officer's recommendation, which was denying the quasi judicial appeal. So, my recommendation would be that we vote
down Commissioner Burns's motion and then go from there. Okay. All in favor of the motion, indicate so by saying I. >> I. Those opposed? >> No. Okay, that motion fails. >> Is there a motion to approve the hearing
officer's recommendation? >> Can you state the nos? >> Hold on. Wait. I thought you just deny I thought you just moved to deny his >> We did. We got to make a motion now. >> We have to make a motion to approve the special m or the hearing officer's
recommendation. Somebody have a motion to approve the hearing officer's recommendation of denial of the quasitial appeal. >> I move that. Is there a second? >> I will second it. And I think and when we get into discussion, I'd like to add
to that. >> Okay. Uh motion and a second discussion. >> I think we're this church wants to serve the community. They're going to have ball fields. They're going to have service. They may have it in multiple languages.
It's not us to decide. Their doors are open. Um we have plenty of churches in and around this entire city. Um many times they're much better neighbors than some of the other commercial operators. Um I do think when you talk about ball
fields and green space, this is going to be positive. When you think about using the existing building versus added impervious surface, I think this is a good thing. We have stressed the 200. You have heard it here and if it comes back to me, I'm going to remember this
that the 200 was stated strongly and we not exceed that. >> Further discussion hearing? None. All in favor of the motion indicate so by saying I. >> I. Those opposed? >> I. >> And so the motion carries 4 to two.
Okay. We're not done. Would you read the ordinance um accompanying this in item 13E? >> Ordinance number 2026-21, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Orlando, Florida, reszoning certain land generally located west of
Aaron Avenue, east of South Ivy Lane, north of Casia Street and south of Sepa Street, and comprised of 4.2 acres of land more or less from public use to plan development, providing for severability, correction of scrimmers errors, permit disclaimer, and and an effective date. I'll move the ordinance.
>> Second >> motion in a second. Okay, we have two requests to speak on this. Macy N is Mac. >> Oh, you're on general appearance. Okay, >> we'll get you at general appearance.
Wendell Webster. Okay. >> Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. My name is Wendell Webster. I live at 4511 Morris Street, Orlando, Florida 32811. I live and work in this community and
I'm here today as a resident, not on behalf of any organization to ask you to deny the reasonzoning request for 1600 Erin Avenue. I want to be clear, my opposition is not about whether this congregation is welcome here or whether
their mission has value. My concern is narrow and practical. This stretch of Aaron Avenue simply cannot carry the traffic this church would bring. Aaron Avenue is a two-lane road. It was never built for the volume of vehicles that come with large worship
services, weddings, funerals, and special events. Services often happen multiple times per week with hundreds or thousands of cars arriving and leaving within the same narrow window. A road this size cannot absorb this without
gridlock spilling onto the surrounding streets. I serve as pastor of a congregation just down the road from 1600 Aaron Avenue. And many of my members, most of them elderly, travel this exact corridor every week to get to church. But not only to church, to
doctor's appointments, to the grocery store, and other essential places uh that they use. They are not equipped to navigate sudden congestion, detours, or blocked intersections. This is not a an inconvenience to them. It's a genuine
burden on their independence and on their safety. It's also a safety issue for every resident in this community. Many of our residents drive small electric vehicles, scooters, bikes, wheelchairs, which are quieter and harder to hear approaching, especially
for pedestrians, cyclists, and children. Adding heavy irregular traffic surges surges to a one-lane road already used by quiet vehicles such as these creates a real risk of collision. And perhaps most urgent, a one a two-lane road
cannot guarantee access for fire trucks and ambulances. If Aaron Avenue is backed up during a service and a resident on this street needs emergency help, minutes may be precious and responders may have no way to get to them. That is not a hypothetical.
This is a foreseeable consequence of this reasonzoning and its weigh heavily on this commission. This is at its core a question of compatibility. A use of this scale belongs on a road built to carry it, not on a s two-lane
residential street that was never designed for it. I respectfully ask this commission to deny this resentment request or at a minimum work with community residents and partners to ensure a full traffic and emergency access study before any approval moves forward. Thank you for your time and
your service to this community. >> Thank you. Okay, Macine. >> Good evening, Commissioner Macinis from 912 Wooden Boulevard. I come before you today because I grew up at Carver Court.
You build apartments on a dump. And the people back in my days, it was happy to build homes, resident homes, that we could own homes in that neighborhood. In the past few years, 564 apartments is
supposed to be built where Lake Man Home is. I have approached you all with that. That's over a thousand calls. Johnson Village, they got apartment buildings. Ivy Lane, they got apartment buildings. Traffic,
you all are endangering the people in West Orlando. We have history over there. I know about history. 83 years now we are being caused the next thing you're going to say the
environment is poor we are would lose our homes I don't want to go back to the plant plantation because we won't have any place to go it's time for you all to think about what we need nobody listens to the
people in West Washington shores every Today we got people coming off of John Young Paul. Colombia is backed up. Now you bringing a church in our community. [clears throat] I hope that this church doesn't do what
they're doing in Minneapolis, Minnesota. I hope they don't do that. Bringing illegal people into our and hiding them in that church. This is the same thing. We know the illegals that's in our community hiding.
And read my lips. I personally are going to the governor and the president of the United States to come in and investigate what is happening. We are the last.
You do not listen to our concerns. I brought to you all over a thousand cars will be in the little Washington Shores neighborhood if you allow these people to build that 564 apartments in our neighborhood. Now you
got a four-story apartment on Orange Center. Reverend Wiggins in that area. We are just being pushed out our neighborhood. All of a sudden people want to come into a neighborhood. We have history. You pushed us out there. Now you got
people coming in want to take over the neighborhood. I tell you I will be going. I don't I might be going by myself but this what you all are doing to our community. I'm
going to the state and I'm going to the federal government. It needs to be investigated where this money is coming in. who's buying this property and where the money is going because it's sure not coming out in our neighborhood. All our streets are bad.
They're talking. >> Thank you, Mac. Okay, there's a motion to approve the ordinance. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All in favor of the motion indicates so by saying I. I. Those opposed?
>> Okay. 42 again. Okay. Motion carries. That concludes the official business today. Ed, could you get us ready for general appearance? [music] [music] [music] >> [music]