we'll say that they're in the back [Music] testing one two three pardon me i'm putting this back [Music] if you see
[Music] [Music] oh this forever [Applause] [Music] yeah i made sure everything what happened [Music]
they have [Music] yeah i'm like now it's kind of so all right thank you [Applause] how you feel hey how you doing
fun times use [Music] how you doing nice to be here good evening [Music] did you understand good evening before we get started if
there's anybody that's wanting to address the lpa chamber um there are some speaking forms in the back if you want to address us on any of the items that that's on the agenda okay [Music]
yeah all right i think this all right good evening gentlemen good evening welcome to the contentious this is two
okay all right that's right we got that's right thank you ma'am do you want to speak tonight
you will have to submit one of these thank you here you go fill it up and then just return it back to me okay got it thank you you're welcome mr lopez can you make the announcement about filling out the form i don't think everybody heard you the first time nobody heard so before i'm going to hold off on the meeting because we have one board member
that's stuck in traffic around the corner basically so anyone wishing to speak on any of the items that's presented tonight you need to fill out a request to address the the lpa board and i want to give everybody
the opportunity to be heard thank you talking to someone [Applause] you all right oh no worries thank you mhm
i knew that where no i'm at o park terrace so right on park o boulevard no oh okay mhm mhm [Music]
okay congratulations [Music] good evening everyone welcome to the april 1st lpa meeting for april it is now 6:31 i ask that everyone for courtesy to please silent their cell phones
can we have a roll call please yes person tonight we have daryl lopez bruce kavanaaugh lisa ramsey ryan hulcom arian bryant david dever and katherine han is on her way thank you the next item is is a removal of minutes
from our last meeting is there a motion for the minutes approval [Music] i can make a motion to uh approve the minutes from the last meeting thank you mr col is there a second second thank you mr any discussion on the minutes seeing none i'll call the vote all those
in favor of the minutes say i i approve next item on the agenda is public comment this is a time oh sorry i'll screw it up closer the next item is public comments on any item that's not on the
agenda seeing none i will close those comments the next item is um public meetings we have none scheduled next item is public hearings there are two ordinances for tonight they will both be read simultaneously uh i'm going to ask
that um you hold all your applauses and claps and julations and booze hold don't do them okay now it has been brought to my attention that in social media that this parcel of land is designated as residential it is not it
is a pud which is zone commercial it has been zon for a very very long time so that being said i will open this to the developer to please come up and present your case good evening for the record logan ops
215 north yola drive um i want to start just by saying uh i know this is a familiar project to everybody uh it's been before this body before and in working with staff and the community and recommendations from this body uh we've
had a community meeting a voluntary community meeting to discuss some of these items and so what i what i tried to do in my presentation is just be efficient and you know respectful of everyone's time talk to some of the things we heard um and speak to those
directly i also wanted to note that because um the chair chairman mentions social media there's been emails we've done our best to to disseminate information um but i want to be sure that in this forum this public hearing
uh which affords uh everyone to speak publicly and and address their comments concerns questions um that i will do my best to to direct my presentation to those and then mr chairman if it's your pleasure maybe just reserve a few minutes after public comment to to
respond to anything new we hear so that we can all leave here today uh in fully informed on the project with that i'll dive right in um the request as noted is an approval of future land use amendment and reszoning uh for just shy of 10 acres um
we all know the site uh well um it is part of an overall pud uh commonly referred to as the river oaks uh reserve pud uh in that pud and you'll i know you'll get some of this history from staff uh about 15 1.5 acres were
designated commercial by virtue of the development agreement that accompanies uh this pud and so uh we we had heard some confusion over the it being zoned uh residential the future land use
designation is currently low density residential however under the avido land development code and comprehensive plan commercial is allowed under that future land use designation by virtue of a development agreement and so it is correct to identify the property's
future land use designation as low density residential however its approved use is commercial and we can see that here you know the publix across the street uh has the same designation so i think that kind of helps walk through the organizational component of of of
the residential but the proposed future land use is mixed use uh as consistent with your comprehensive plan now the mixed use future land use designation allows up to 24 dwelling units an acre um what's being requested today is just under that at 23.3 as you
look at the overall site uh so within the plan's density limits the zoning uh is pud under the river oaks reserve which you heard me discuss and the proposed zoning is also pud because we would be amending uh the development agreement affecting this property to
make sure those development standards performance standards use standards are all appropriately accounted for in our request today so wanted to walk through the organizational components the lingo so we can we can talk about that uh productively
this is a rendering of the proposed plan um what what you see here the the layout uh the landscaping the access points uh took great care uh to organize this uh
intended use uh appropriately with the property uh you can see the placement of the amenity like the pool allowing some further separation um from the existing uh natural vegetation there is also a residential
development to the north um uh we had kind of key participants from that community at our voluntary community meeting um and i'll talk about some of the points we discussed there um and what's being highlighted there if you can kind of see on the northern portion
is what is being proposed as the retail so that's the mixeduse component to this age restricted 55 plus uh multif family community um i'll talk a little bit about this in a future slide but what you see here on surrounding the property
uh exist preserving existing vegetation adding enhanced landscape the placement of our retention again all of that's intentional based on what we've we've heard so this is just an outline this is in your staff report of of kind of a breakdown of the development program and
i wanted to call these things out because this was the subject of recent changes to your comprehensive plan to allow for some increased densities um to for more vertical development to make sure that we can account for things like
wetland open space and ponds particularly that open space requirement again so to allow uh more organized compact development uh while retaining wetland open space and pond and so i call these out because um together again
the wetland open space and pond uh account for 44% of the overall site not being developed here's a concept plan um of of what's being proposed uh kind of a on the ground level as opposed to the
aerial you've just seen and there's additional renderings as well uh but i want to dive right into the community outreach that community meeting what we've heard what we'll continue to hear tonight and address some of those those items and discussion points uh one is
the line of sight uh would you see this this development from the existing uh river oaks reserve community um and so we we put together this concept plan to illustrate that between our retention pond uh the again natural vegetation and
from as a result of the community meeting and what we've heard additional landscaping to be placed in that area uh and i'll show another uh concept of that uh as well as just the the distance and the existing pond on the river oaks reserve there is great distance
separating and we have found in this line of sight visual that and this was presented at the community meeting uh that will obstruct the line of sight view from the river oaks reserve it's also important to note that this isn't a head-on this is a little bit of a we're kind of bringing it together like a pie
slice um really on this last unit looking forward um the our proposed development would be off to the side um and you'll see that in other pictures as well and here's that enhanced landscape buffer we were talking about and and it highlights some of those areas again
there will be some preservation of natural materials uh natural vegetation but we are proposing increased landscaping to just further buffer again two ponds natural vegetation additional landscaping uh there's also a conservation easement buffer that runs
around the peripheral of the property to assist in that regard and traffic generation and i'll also get to this in in future slides but as the chair uh correctly pointed out there this property is uh identified and permitted for commercial uses and so
what you see here a fairly drastic drop in and external trips is because changing from commercial which has constant you know in and out and and traffic vehicular movement um changing to an age restricted
uh 172 unit uh residential component drastically reduces those trips that would previously you know be allotted to a commercial development which again could come in today without any future public hearing uh that commercial
component and so that's where we see this drop um i'll note that from the last meeting that there's there's a way in which a veto uh looks at traffic trips that's unique um but notwithstanding this sort of drastic
drop in an an external trip count um is is an opportunity uh that that we are hoping to seize upon and the development agreement and uh the pub process allows specific standards by which we can uh seize that opportunity through this body
and ultimately the city council a few items of note here uh organization of uh traffic and safety are those things we've heard uh the the uh medians being shown kind of in an orang-ish color you see the landscape
buffer uh additional striping um i'm going to show another slide as well but all of these act to help uh decelerate uh certain vehicles and allow for both uh sight view and sight circulations and
safe uh traffic flow uh through this area you'll see two it's a little hard to see on the bottom but there are two access points directly onto lockwood um as well this is some additional striping this this uh turn lane is being proposed
in conjunction with staff and the comments we heard um to help uh with again site safety um there's existing today some uh confusing striping um and it's lack some
additional uh organization that you see here and so we took great care in working with staff to add these things like the delineators in the top right again the turn lane and appropriate striping to uh enhance the the traffic flow uh in the
area the 55 plus program was talked about a lot um we will enforced that a resident be over 55 years of age we have taken in new information since even i've finalized this powerpoint and we were are also
um proposing the voluntary condition that all residents in our units must be 55 years or older um we heard certain specific comments like could a ucf student move in there with a parent or perhaps a you know younger grandparent
and so um well taken the point's well taken we have a similar asset class and the average age of residents in that community are are 72 and we thought well we're certainly comfortable providing the voluntary condition that all residents be 55 plus um to to speak to
that specific concern but there's also programming that goes with this community especially wellness programs exercise classes your uh typical main stays like bingo happy hour game night events around the pool um that go along with the 55 plus program um we've found
that these residents also too uh uh across the board use uh less vehicles they certainly have vehicles they just use less as we've as we've seen um that's not necessarily included within your traffic count but it would
further decrease the trips and because we're here on a future land use amendment request uh i'd be remiss not to address the comprehensive plan um you've heard me talk about it briefly throughout this project but uh this is what uh this body is helped uh
you know this is one of the duties is to look at your comprehensive plan and ensure consistency on requested projects and so these are some of the objectives and policies uh we're bringing with this intended use one is to discourage urban sprawl again that's by allowing that
more vertical development less uh sprawl this is also in an area and providing a uh asset class a residential use that is just lacking in the city um and one that the market uh is is responding to um we've also as we've outlined in some of
the slides looked at things like safe and efficient pedestrian non-motorized vehicle access the walkability component is a goal of the comprehensive plan and as we all know uh great care has gone into some of the revisions to that comprehensive plan to ensure these
objectives policies and goals and as you'll see in your staff report uh staff has concluded that we are consistent with your comprehensive plan and meet those goals you heard me just say that again this from your staff report consistency to increase a viable mixture of land
uses uh walkability and a and a unique and different a asset class that's desperately needed um in the area um i do have here a request slide there's one more i want to touch on afterwards and then i'll i'll sit down and i know plenty of folks are here to speak
tonight and and and thank you for your time i look forward to discussing with you i just wanted to point out this kind of one more on the commercial um this was just a mockup of okay if if we didn't need another public hearing to do commercial what could kind of go there
we've heard before um you know quite frankly that well this hasn't been developed commercial before so we think it never will so maybe a denial is the right thing because uh you know we can kind of roll the dice will never get developed again i we know that it that
it can be commercial and we know what's out there like publix and and the and the drugstore the pharmacy on the corner um when you have a commercial use set back from the main intersection like that it typically attracts in the market
some higher you know traffic count commercial uses it's also not your main you know anchor tenants that you see again like the publix uh we've we've seen and again this is from your these are permitted uses things like tire shops and and smoke shops and and the
like uh those are the things that kind of go into these areas and and what do they do they this is a heat map showing traffic uh you know noise um those are the types of things that that come from those commercial uses and so again when
we look at this project and what we can offer that's consistent with your comprehensive plan that meets those goals and also uh compatible with the area and allow that type of uh blend into your purely residential that you
have to the north and beyond uh is is this 55 plus community with a mixeduse component that services that area um and so with that i will uh sit down i know staff has a presentation to give as well and i appreciate the opportunity to to
respond to make sure that uh all questions are answered thank you for your time thank you can we hear from staff sure thank you mr chair okay so this is a request for the city of oto local planning agency to
recommend an amendment to the city's future land use map changing the future land use designation for approximately 9.62 62 acres located on the east side of lockwood boulevard the north side of county road 419 from low density residential to mixed use the applicant
is linda keer with kamaya real estate per section florida statutes 163 31744a the local planning agency is responsible for the preparation of comprehensive plan amendments and shall make recommendation to the city council
regarding adoption and/or amendment of said plan subject map amendment qualifies as a small-cale comprehensive plan amendment per chapter 163 florida statutes a smallcale comprehensive plan amendment requires one public hearing before the local planning agency and one
public hearing before the city council upon adoption a copy of the amendment will be provided to the florida department of commerce subject amendment will become effective 31 days after adoption provided that the florida department of commerce does not review the amendment or no one files an appeal with the state division of administrative hearings
the purpose of this proposed future land use map amendment is to allow for a mixeduse development on the subject property to include 172 age restricted multif family residential dwelling units and approximately 6,200 ft of commercial retail space the commercial retail space
is proposing to follow the city's commercial c1 zoning district uh permissible uses but a restaurant use is specifically prohibited within the pud development agreement this is also a request for the civito local planning agency to recommend an
amendment to the city's official zoning map for approximately 9.62 acres located on the east side of lockwood boulevard in the north side of county road 419 from plan unit development to plan unit development the applicant is also linda keer with kamaya real estate purpose of the proposed zoning
map amendment is to establish the land development regulations and conceptual development plan for the subject property a location map of the subject property is provided in attachment one the subject property is designated with the lowdensity residential future land use designation on the comprehensive plan 2045 future land use map and
planned unit development zoning district on the official zoning map unlike conventional zoning districts such as c2 commercial the land development code does not contain minimum and maximum land development standards for the ped zoning district instead the ped zoning district land development regulations
are established through the approval of a development agreement and conceptual development plan that are exhibits of an ordinance adopting a zoning map amendment each pud development agreement constitutes the creation of a unique zoning district that is the result of a negotiated process in which and during
which sound and generally accepted land use planning practices and principles are applied and imposed uh as the applicant uh discussed at its january 28th 2025 public hearing the local planning agency considered ordinances 1754 and 1755 during the
public hearing the local planning agency and the applicant agreed to continue the public hearing for 30 days to allow the applicant to host a community meeting with the residents uh who attended the lpa public hearing they conducted the community meeting on february 13 2025 uh
you heard the concerns raised in the applicant's response to those concerns um at this point i'm going to introduce our development services deputy director de deborah pierre uh to walk through staff's finish up staff's presentation
thank you mr peacock good evening lpa um can you pull up the presentation so tonight i'm going to walk you through the existing um river oaks reserve can we show the record that miss hunt is now
present can you show the record yes would you show the record that she's here yes mr chair thank you thank you mr chairman so tonight i'm going to walk you through the history of
the river oaks reserve planned unit development and um and the ex the proposed development and we're going to do some comparisons [Applause] so so this is the um river oaks reserve
planning and development this is what they we call the conceptual development plan and one of the things that um has been a little confusing for the residents and perhaps for the board as well is the future land use designation
of lowdensity residential and then the zoning of planned unit development so um back in the '9s this was back in '95 um richland properties they um came
through with the comprehensive plan amendment um and it went from suburban estates to the city of ovido lowdensity residential within lowdensity residential future land use designation it does allow for a mixeduse development
in order to do a mixeduse development you had to have a what's called a planned unit development um zoning designation so with the planned unit development zoning designation it requires a development agreement as well
as a conceptual development plan so this was their conceptual development plan and i'm going to try to point i'm not quite sure if i can get this right hopefully maybe not the top
one maybe i have to point it there we go okay so now we're rocking and rolling okay so you'll see let me go this way this is a residential tract that was the approved residential tract there and
it's all a part of the same plan unit development which is the river oaks reserve plan unit development um and then you have the commercial tract which is here so this is all you also have in this area upland buffers um you have
conservation tracks which would be the ut u2 um and u1 you also have um up where it says upland conservation so this entire area is a part of one development
and it's called the river oaks reserve planned unit development now the commercial track here in the development agreement says that it follows the c1 zoning uses which is commercial c1 is
our least intense commercial zoning we have c1 c2 c2 is the most intense c1 is the least intense of the commercial but it is still commercial so nothing in that area where it says commercial is
zoned for residential there's nothing in there that's zoned for residential today so even though it says low density residential that is the future land use the actual zoning is pud and it follows the c1 zoning district
so let's see the next slide so this is the area in 1995 this was april 13th 1995 and as you can see you see the you see the econ the econ river is
here you see that and then the subject property is here you see um lockwood this way and then 419 this way and as you can see waverly woods was not developed at that time which would have
been here where the publix is um kingsbridge east they started doing their um infrastructure at that time you'll see the retention ponds that's over in here um the the area was pristine the area where the subject
property is located as well as where the town homes would be located um later in history it's a pristine area near the econ it's all pristine the actually the entire area including where waverly
woods is it's all it's all vacant so um we started back in 1995 because 1995 is when the actual comp plan amendment that richland properties put together to the city for that area was
submitted to the city and sent to the state so what was happening this is just fun facts so what was happening in 1995 around the time when richland properties submitted their application to the city
so dvds um were invented and developed in 1995 the first film created entirely with computerenerated imagery cgi which toy story was created that way you also
had the oj simpson trial and then yahoo believe it or not was still a college project and this is just to put a light touch on on the presentation so what was happening in oto in
1995 so we see in 1995 in ovido there were residents who were concerned about the potential mall there was not a mall at that time but we had multiple newspaper outlets um talking about residents in ovido being upset about the
traffic that could be generated from this potential mall so just to put things into perspective whenever we see development come through we see residents who complain about the potential traffic about the potential
impact that these developments bring so we've seen that with a number of developments including the river oaks reserve um planned unit development which is the one where this property is
situated so in terms of history it was um richland it's called richland seminal ranch at the time who submitted the application for a comprehensive plan amendment to the city so it was
transmitted to the state which is the florida department of community affairs as um comprehensive plan amendment 9502 now it was challenged it was challenged by both the state which is the florida department of community affairs which is now florida department
of economic opportunity and a coalition of environmental and citizens group interested in stopping the development they didn't want any residential they didn't want any commercial they didn't want anything next in that area where
river oaks reserve is because it was pristine they were concerned about all the environmental issues um there were a lot of issues traffic um there were a lot of issues so it was eventually resolved with a stipulated settlement
agreement and it was arrived between all parties so the state all the environmental agencies that were concerned um it was adopted into the city's comprehensive plan um and it became an appendix to the back of the
comprehensive plan when we updated our comprehensive plan back in 2022 if the board will remember the comprehensive plan process that we went through we um the state as well as the reviewing agencies the environmental agencies
allowed the city to remove that appendix from um the city's comprehensive plan but the land use remained in place the development agreement remained in place it was just that it was not an appendix to the city's comprehensive plan
so the existing um river oaks reserve planned unit development entitlement um it was for the entire property which was 106 acres and there was a commercial track that we that i showed you on the
map that was about 15.40 acres and it was phase 1 so it allowed uses within the c1 zoning district that we talked about earlier those uses include included banks with drive-through facilities restaurants
with drive-thru facilities shopping centers produce markets recreation uses that's conducted entirely inside the building and it also included institutional uses so the floor area ratio um in the development agreement
was 0.23 um floor area ratio as well as um it was or a building area of 10,000 square ft gross of gross square feet per acre the height in the development
agreement was limited to 35 ft for any building in that commercial area the residential track that i showed you um in the in the map was 22.6 acres and we were limited in the
stipulated settlement agreement as well as in the development agreement to a maximum of 50 dwelling units for that entire 22.6 acres so um this is that same area so
you'll see the proposed um lot that lot has always had development entitlements and it's always been commercial um so it's not that this land had no development entitlements it was always planned it was a planned parcel um so
it's not um that it's going from some residentially zoned um land it's going from commercial to more of a mixeduse development so let us talk about um from january 25th 1999 and we're
going to go and we're going to look at um what has happened like how long it took to develop and what has developed so you'll see kingsbridge east um they started their approvals as
well here you'll see kingsbridge you're starting to see um the development of the homes it was actually approved july 17th 1995 um you still don't see waverly woods you don't see anything in river
oaks reserve either so december 1st 1999 is when you really start to see waverly woods develop you see that shopping center which is a riverside landings where the publix is located and you'll see sometimes it takes a while from the time
that they are approved with the site plan to the time when they're actually constructed like the riverside landings the site development order was approved in 1998 wasn't until 99 when you start to see the actual construction you also
see the ovita grove apartments um the construction of that here was approved in 97 and we're in 99 then you still the river oaks reserve area is still vacant but you start to
see some clearing go on there um which is in this area you see some clearing um waverly woods is already constructed and you see the lockwood self storage um is being um
constructed now we're starting to see um more development um you see the walgreens um that's at the corner of lockwood and and 419 you start to see that um that's the only thing that's there
you do see a retention pond on the subject property do you do see that then the sun trust is developed which is now truest today and that's 2007 november 2007 you start to see the
construction of the river oaks reserve the town home you also see the um river oaks reserve um just a um this is more of the the southern portion of this the
development you start to see that which is phase one then you see the town homes completed this is 2012 and then the ovito village condominium is is beginning to be constructed
in the area you see that storage area which is here you start to see the storage being constructed and then the lake nona office building is also being constructed on the site there
so when we talk about the comprehensive plan and and i know most of you some of you were on the on the board when we were going through the rewrite of our comprehensive plan the update so some of the qualities that we look for in um when we're changing the comprehensive
plan um are listed in that vision so the vision of our comprehensive plan is to en encourage more mixed use development is to provide for connectivity ensure that there's capacity we also talk about the multimodal
um compact infill complete streets we want something that's vibrant creates a sense of place has smart design and we also focus on designs so we're going to talk about these qualities and and how it meets how the proposed project meets
some of these qualities so let's look at arya at ovido and what they are requesting so it's a mixeduse development and in it they have both
residential and commercial so the residential component of it is 172 age restricted multif family dwelling units and that's in that blue area um and then they also have amenities for this development which includes pickle ball
courts dog park clubhouse pool conservation areas the commercial portion of it is 6,200 square ft of retail green which is the green area um restaurants are not allowed in this
particular um pud if they want restaurants they would have to come back with another traffic study and update it um it was based on the impacts of what they are proposing um on this site the maximum height of um the
building will be five stories is 70 ft they're proposing a total of 294 parking spaces their open space is 30.29% um and they're also proposing proposing the conservation easement buffer um at a
average of 50 ft and a minimum of 25 ft for the buffer now i want to talk about the open space because open space according to the existing development agreement is 30% that's the minimum for the existing development agreement
they're proposing 30.29% we just went through a round of land development code amendments and i know you all very clearly remember that because those were some long meetings in the um land development um code update
our minimum open space requirement is 25% so they are um providing more than the land development code 25% um and they're also providing 29% more than what the development agreement the
existing river oaks reserve development agreement requires so i just wanted to point that out as well now the mixed use development in terms of the qualities of the desired development um for this particular
development um mixed use was one of the criteria so this property has the mixed use it has 172 um multif family units as well as the commercial component so it is a mixed use um compact infill was
also one of the criteria and um this is the development of vacant property and it's within an existing urban area we have development surrounded um on all sides of this property so you have the publix across the street you have the
retail commercial um that's off of 419 you also have the town homes that's there um this it when you have a mixed use or compact infill the approach is to maximize land efficiency and it promotes
sustainability and enhance walkability by creating mixeduse environments within already developed areas um the it is an increase in density um but it doesn't come with the same impact so it doesn't come with the same
impact of um what could be developed there and it doesn't come with the same impact of an existing multif family development an existing multif family development would have more traffic it would also have kids um this particular
development because it's 55 and plus they're exempt from school capacity um that's something the school board determined not the city um so they're exempt from that because it it's 55 and plus 55
plus it also has smart design they're going to have electric vehicle charging stations um we used to have it in our code where it was required if you had so many um parking spaces but the state changed that um it's not we can't require it anymore but they wanted to
keep it in their development agreement because it's something that they are committed to doing so it's also because it's a mixed use development it's um creating a walkable area that blends the residential commercial and recreational
spaces together for accessibility and it reduces commuter times now one thing that was not mentioned is that we believe that this is also aging in place um it's allowing a place for older adults to live safely
um that blends residential commercial and recreational areas um it also allows for the social inclusion of aging population and it's not a product that we have here in the city we do not have that we wanted to have it at the mall
but the developer changed it um so we now have this one which would be the only one in ovido so i wanted to take a look at um the potential development under the existing river oaks reserve development agreement and the potential use would be
a shopping center um and the size uh there's a list of uses that can go under c1 i took the most intense um the size of it is 96,300 square ft which is um you remember the two calculations that you
can use i used a more modest calculation which was the 10,000 square ft per gross area which comes up to 96,300 square ft so i wanted to kind of see what um development is comparable to
that size so we looked at the walmart discount store walmart has three types of of stores you know you have the super center they have the neighborhood and then they have this discount store super center is much bigger than the discount store and the neighborhood is smaller so
the walmart discount store which is at the corner of a loma near 417 um is 99,621 square ft um and then i looked at the shops at sterling creek which is in live oak reserve live oak reserve is
another um lowdensity residential planned unit development which has commercial component this is their commercial component which is at shops at sterling creek which is a publix their publix is 51,013 square feet so we looked at tried
to see what size would fit um would be comparable to that 96,300 so we just looked at those two buildings just to give you an idea of the square footage so based on the 9600 um
96,300 foot shopping center um we did some traffic calculations um for weekday comes up to 9,999 trips per per day daily on a daily basis weekday am peak hour comes up to
680 trips weekday pm peak hours is 963 trips so this would be with an open space minimum of 30% and a maximum height of 35 um feet this is the existing pud
entitlements looking at arya at ovido the trip generations um we've talked about this already but i'm going to go over it the 172 age restricted dwelling units and the 6,200 square foot of retail for the weekday trips would
generate uh for the senior adults 525 trips the retail would generate 495 trips for a total of 1,020 daily trips weekday daily trips the am peak hour
you'll see the senior housing 34 trips the retail is 15 trips the total would be 49 trips um the am peak hour the pm peak hour would be 43 trips for the senior adult the retail would be 41
trips and the total would be 84 trips so when you look at character because character was one of the things that came up at the last lpa meeting we're going to do a comparison as well of of of what could potentially go there to what arya edovvito is proposing but we
wanted to talk about um character so when we look at character we look at the transition of the uses so in this case we want to make sure that the most intense uses are along the roads so you have existing
commercial that's along 419 you have all those commercial uses that's there so that's the most intense and then mix use is less intense than the commercial so you want that behind the commercial then you have the single family which is
actually the town homes behind that and the single family generates less impact than the mixed use so it all goes in order so it's it's it's compatible in terms of the transition of uses and the
impacts the height the proposed height is 70 ft um which is equal to five stories for this particular development um the applicant did show a graphic showing the line of sight from the nearest home in river oaks reserve the
nearest town home um from the fivestory building was at least 500 ft from the view of the nearest town homes and that was separated by the line of trees and then they're also proposing to increase uh to add more um landscaping there to
break up that line of sight town homes itself um are typically not um built in lowdensity residential they're typically it's a typology that it's built in medium density residential
because they normally like to get about 8 units per acre um but because this particular development was only limited to to 50 units they couldn't get any more units um it was a single family it's still considered single family is
just single family attached but the typology is normally um requested in medium density residential so sidebyside comparisons so we looked at the impacts of the potential development under the existing
development agreement compared to the impacts of arya at ovido um we looked at the size the size the proposed the size of the existing what can go is 9600
96,300 ft compared to the 48,524 and that's adding the the building size of the 172 age restricted with the 6,156 square ft retail commercial comes up to
48,524 square ft so it's um it's a decrease in what um could be on that property it's a decrease of 47,776 we looked at the weekday trips weekday trips for the shopping center
9,999 trips compared to the weekday trips of the 1,020 trips it's actually a decrease of the daily trips by 8,79 the am peak hour trips um ex the proposed for the existing shopping
center would be 680 trips um the peak hour 49 trips for arya edovto so it's a decrease of 631 trips the pm peak hour trips is 963 um with arya o edovo it would be 84
trips decrease of 879 trips we looked at the open space open space minimum is 30% under the existing development agreement under the proposed is 30.29% so it's an increase there so
they're increasing open space by 29% when you compare it to the land development code requirements of 25 is actually increasing more by 5% 5.29% the height um of the existing
development agreement is 35 ft the proposed is 70 feet there's an increase of 35 feet parking spaces um under the shopping center uh it's required to have 385 the area at ovido they're going to
have 294 so that there's a decrease of 91 um parking spaces which leaves for more open space for the site so the city received additional correspondence we have submitted it to
the clerk for the record um the city's environmental consultants consultant david manin and our transportation consultant cockwan they are here to address any environmental or traffic questions it is recommended that the lpa
conduct a public hearing and recommend approval of ordinance numbers 1754 1755 to the city council city council first reading for the ordinance um will happen on april 21st it is not a public hearing it's just reading the
ordinance into the record and scheduling the public hearing the public hearing is scheduled for uh monday may 5th this concludes staff's presentation and we are available for questions thank you miss pierre before i open up to uh
public comments i'm going to put someone on the spot i would like for our traffic engineer to kind of give us an overview of exactly how these numbers come across so not only for us but for the everyone that's here that understands what goes on because i think that's one of the biggest issues sure uh kwan ma 225 east
robinson street uh orlando 32801 i'm ready to give deborah a a uh a pe after her name she's she's done a great job with the presentation and uh provided um a lot of great information
on uh on the traffic numbers um so what what was your specific question just give us a rundown how these numbers actually come across how where do we get these numbers from um sure for because i i know but i want everybody else to know
okay so um the trip generation comes out of the institute of traffic uh transportation engineers it uh trip generation manual um that uh we're on the 11th edition now and that is kind of the industry standard uh throughout the
country um it includes hundreds of different land uses uh and those land uses uh use different independent variables for restaurants it can use for example number of square feet or number of seats um for uh single for multif
family it can use based on number of bedrooms or um or just number of units and so all of those are taken from hundreds of surveys um well if you take a look at all the different land uses thousands of surveys uh over the course
of decades and when a new addition comes out the it will take a look at uh the new data and in some cases they will break it break out certain land uses for example where we had um high turnover
sit down restaurants uh in the ninth edition um in the 10th edition they broke it out to fast casual restaurants be because they found restaurants such as chipotle uh cava so on and so forth operate a little bit differently um they update uh rates based on just um uh
emerging trends um uh we're we're seeing a lot of different trends with respect to fast food restaurants uh if anybody goes to chick-fil-a you know that chick-fil-a kind of operates differently than most other uh fast food restaurants
and so there are supplemental uh studies that are done that are incorporated in in those publications so one other lead point we use the traffic counts from seminal county correct and we're obligated to use those counts for roads correct can you go into a little bit
more detail in that as well please sure so um seminal county uh publishes their daily traffic counts and those those counts um are used by all seven of the cities in semino county uh when
conducting uh traffic studies uh traffic studies in seminal county are ba capacities are based on a daily volume um in other jurisdictions the traffic studies may be based on a peak hour or
peak hour peak direction volume so for example valuchia county bases their capacities on a peak hour um time period uh orange county does it on a peak hour peak direction why does it matter it's because when you base it
off of a daily then there are con situations such as mitchell hammock road or other roads that are very highly commuter commuter driven where you have high peaks in one direction during the
am and high peaks in in the other direction in the p.m i can tell this crowd that mitchell hammock is under capacity and they're they're not going to believe me but based on semino county when you look at a when you look at the capacity on a daily
basis then mitchell hammock is under capacity so that's why it matters and fortunately unfortunately that's just how seminal county grades traffic thank you so much so if that if that's
true then that seems inaccurate and what you're saying is like we all know that that isn't the case so why would we trust that because we can't use we can't get our own we have to use simol county's count of course we can't we can't go and get our
own so what does it mean if it doesn't mean what we already know well i mean so on a daily basis if you go if you drive on um mitchell hammock road at 10:00 a.m or
2:00 p.m i bet you you you don't get much traffic at all so you know it in comparatively speaking to the peak hours please don't please so so what you're so what you're getting is that for most
parts of the day that line where uh the actual uh trip demand is compared to capacity is below that line so but during the peak hour what you're what you're getting are the spikes um i don't know the history of why
seinal county grades it on a daily basis okay thank you all right before i open up the public is there i know there's some people who came in late if anybody still wishes to speak i'll give you a couple minutes to go get a form it's in the back there to fill out if i see no one
then i'll go ahead and open for public comments see all right so we'll start i have a request from albert buster please come up you have three minutes to uh for the floor please state your name and address for the record please yes alberto buster 501 wsley
street i'm here tonight as a concerned resident of the city of ovido as well as the president of the waverly woods home uh homeowners association i'm deeply opposed to the proposed zoning not zoning change but the future land use change for this particular ordinance that's before us today uh with the
consideration to construct 172 units and five stories of mixeduse development this project is not in alignment with our city's comprehensive plan nor does it serve the best interest of our communities and i say that plurally because there are multiple communities
that are being impacted by this development they will have long-term negative impacts on traffic infrastructure and our quality of life we just started talking about traffic you know because we experience it every day the hogwash behind what
seino county uses is we we can answer that question is because our council people that run our county are sold to developers that's the point fact it's the reason why they allow it to go that way and i don't have anything particular against the developer here they may be
very nice people however what i want us to be able to understand is that this is going to potentially add over 350 vehicles anybody telling you that somebody just because they're 55 only has less vehicles these people are not dying these people are going to live
well into their 70s and 80s as most people are so these proposed entry points egress and ingress and egress points that are happening here are going to cause a lot of particular issues coming out of that development south onto lockwood boulevard there's already only 650 ft from the lights to that
first proposed entrance which is going to create tons of problems in that particular area it's already difficult on a weekend when there's a lot of things going on or during peak traffic hours to be able to get out of waverly woods onto that particular road i'm
going to spare us on the econ on the the environmental stuff i understand that things have to be developed however what i do want to focus on is this is that this proposal directly contradicts our city's comprehensive plan which designates the future use for for low
density residential and if there is a current usage for this thing to go commercial if that is their implied right currently let them build what they can but what city staff won't tell you is that they've been unsuccessful in being able to get people to build
commercial because who wants to develop commercial that has no visibility because there's already buildings in front of it there's not a lot of accessibility and nobody's going to pour that kind of money into that particular area and that's why it's sat there however when you look at the current situation is that everybody knows that
the future of money is in residential and that's exactly why they want to push this to be able to be to change it to what they want because that's what's going to be the biggest bang for their buck no commercial business is going to spend their money there and when we particularly look at this issue it
doesn't matter when we look at it and we see it for what it is what it's actually doing is trying to pull the wool over our eyes to make us believe thank you that we you know that that we're just going to have the staff just rammed down our throats the threats to you because
their job is to make you know to make proposals and to make approvals your time is your job is to stand for principle and to protect our city thank you for your time the next person i have is uh megan mccullen
please state your name and address for the record hi my name is megan mccllum my address is 541 farmingham court oto um so thank you for letting me speak tonight i'm actually not in opposition to this development i don't know that i'm you
know super for it but um i i think we are naive to think that that parcel will remain undeveloped and i do believe there are benefits to a 55 and up um community such as this um it will be lower density traffic than other options
and it will provide hopefully we'll be able to have some people who live in um homes for you know family of five and ovo who maybe their kids have moved out maybe would be interested in moving into something like this however my big concern is does relate to traffic um i
understand that that road is probably rated to be able to handle that level of traffic it's really just the location at that what's going to kind of become an intersection there you know so close to a light it is already very difficult to turn left out of that publix um it's
hard to see um to turn left it's hard to see the cars coming down rockwood going south um and then it's hard to see around the cars that are turning left onto 419 so that's going to be a challenge um you know they talked about um you know being able to walk to publix
and i i love that you know i walk to publix but i think it's it's kind of crazy to think people are going to cross lockwood at that point you know with without a crosswalk and you can't put a crosswalk right there when it's so close
to the to that light so um i appreciate the changes the developer has made to address traffic issues but i think there's still some more changes that need to be made in order to um protect safety and you know make it so that people
can travel with as few headaches as possible so thank you thank you the next person i have is deborah alivas i'm sorry if i mispronounced it please state your name and address for the record and you have three minutes
i'm deborah alvis and i live uh at 1900 ashlin trail in waverly woods um one of the things that other than the scare tactic sort of of what could have be at that intersection i wanted to point out that in 1995 when they changed the
comprehensive plan they allowed 50 units which were single family homes these 172 apartments for over 55 people will not be low density 55 they may be 55 and over but they're going to have two
working people till likely 65 at least possibly 70 in today's economy i mean the traffic now coming down lockwood particularly i love the church their great neighbor but on wednesdays and sundays you cannot the traffic is backed
up past waverly woods to get through that intersection traffic is the main reason that everyone who leaves ovido is leaving i don't i don't say that we don't need a 55 and over senior if you want to call myself senior um it's it's
i applaud that but that's not the right location for it too close to the river it is a residential area for homeowners and it's already crowded we don't need more people in my opinion um the other
thing i had a question about is un and this may be part of what we're changing if i understood the first slide the height requirement was 35 ft and this apartment complex is going to be five stories
so that's if we're going to change things we need to like follow the plan that was originally done in 1995 to my opinion if they allowed that i won't say shame on them the world looks a lot different than it did in 1995 but i
don't think we should throw out everything just because now we want to develop every square inch near the mall is a lot less traffic quite honestly that'd be an excellent location for this near the mall but anyway that's all i have to say thank you thank you next
person i have is laura i can't get an idea on thank you sorry about that please state your name and address for the record please my name is laura ang i live at 1720 ashlin trail in waverly
woods i've been there now for 22 years so i have seen some changes in the traffic and development and i appreciate um before 2002 uh 2003 when i moved in uh what it once looked like i do oppose
the changes as well i did already change uh my morning commute i used to make a left out of ashlin trail a left onto lockwood and i no longer can in the morning hours during rush hour so i go out our main entrance which is the 419
entrance to make changes with my own commute i do see that um living there as well if you're outside you constantly hear sirens some type of accident or something going through at the corner
there quite often i do feel that the changes would make more traffic very difficult i already changed my routine in going to publix i do go out a different entrance because that intersection is very difficult to turn
onto lockwood going back to ashland for waverly um i feel it's going to be very treacherous to get in and out of our subdivision especially with the construction of 419 eventually um right now it's currently just one lane in
front of our entrance which will help when it gets to two but there will be very difficulties with the construction going on and with everything in place so i do feel the traffic is going to be difficult and i thank you for your time
i'm just opposing it thank you next i have a sarah sp it's falling yep sorry no good please state your name and address for the record please sarah spalding uh 1890 ashlin trail so i
am here i actually oppose the improvement as well um i actually i wasn't going to speak today i decided to as a young home owner i feel like maybe you guys don't get a lot that come in um i'm actually very worried yes about the traffic i think that's the obvious but that's not something that i want to put
my time on here today one would be the multi-purpose use of this area so it's kind of a rhetorical question but adding this 55 plus community i i agree that's fine we can have these kind of sanctioned areas but why can't we
repurpose other infrastructure that exists we have a mall that just shut down essentially why can't we repurpose those buildings we have the traffic area over there we don't have it over here um also yes i i wasn't going to say i was going to say anything about
traffic but yes traffic is dangerous adding some little sticks that they mentioned and some little painting on the road is not going to fix everything but what i worry about is if this is then approved what happens all the way down lockwood boulevard are they going to continue to add more and more and more where all these commercial
developments are the reason i moved here i moved from fort myers fort myers is a very commercially developed area i did not like it there for that reason i wanted to come somewhere where it was very residential focused you can see trees when you're driving we are losing that so we have the infrastructure still
why can't we repurpose that i'm going to continue to ask that because it's a serious concern of mine um additionally i get the i get the money i know listen i work in corporate finance i know everything is how you how do you make money how do we build the
economy it's i it's all a return on investment again why can't we use the current infrastructure that we have you can still have that return on investment build up a little bit to the mall and then use that um also for the 55 plus um i think
there's definitely other areas so we can also use like around the ucf area i think they've repurposed some of their uh living areas to do that as well uh i think that's all i have though thank you thank you next person i have is aaron stork
please state your name and address for the record my name is aaron stork and i'm at 677 evening sky drive in river oaks reserve and i'm just here again to say that i oppose both ordinances and um the building of 172 units thank you
thank you next one is edtork please state your name and address for the record ed stok 677 sky drive uh thanks for your time again and it's great to see some neighbors out here from waverly woods this is uh our my wife and i's third rodeo of coming in here i kind of want to briefly touch on
that cuz i was one of the residents uh that attended the u meeting that was supposed to be kind of like a negotiation discussion uh with the developer and if i'm being completely honest even though i i do uh appreciate their time it was more of a glorified
sales pitch we really didn't negotiate anything uh in terms of like okay what would work for us what would work for them how do we make this smaller in fact i even asked the question kind of near the end of it saying like would this
even work on a smaller scale and there even though they didn't have an answer to tell how many units they needed to make money on this they said no it would not work on a smaller scale so i didn't there was conflict there with that with their with their answer on it um but i i
kind of want to focus this a little bit as my neighbor was saying that i've been pointing out the whole time this does not fit our comp plan i looked it over i talked about that last time um you know we had some good discussion from our our planners about that comp plan um and i
really loved the history lesson there on that truly did um but at the same time when you're looking at that comp plan and you're and you're looking at what they're saying about that and kind of trying to push it through that it is part of our current comp plan it really isn't cuz our comp plan has everything
that's ovito and then it goes west of that there's nothing to this size over on this area and a five-story building i i don't we may have one of those novito there's definitely nothing over on this side of it in fact density-wise we're
talking of about a 500% increase of what should be put there in terms of housing um so i think the thing to focus on is that it's not fitting our current comp plan and the really that's what it's
about is that they want to as my neighbor said they want to push this agenda of a mixed use because they want to get the most amount of units on there to make the money if you look at the office space on there or the commercial part of the plot is relatively small so
what this really is about is high density in terms of the volume of amount of units they want to put there and that's just not right and you know we can talk all day about the traffic but you guys drive that and you understand that the traffic's not going to work out the way they're saying it and one more point on that traffic in that meeting
when we were trying to ask about the traffic one of the their points talking points was that oh well we're just going to use the walgreens plaza as an overflow literally that's what they said that there was going to be an overflow driving through the walgreens parking
lot that's not going to help anything so again i oppose it it doesn't fit our current comp plan um let's stick with that comp plan there's no uh obligation for you guys or the city to change that comp plan for any developer let them
build what they can thank you uh next person i have is nina blankenship please state your name and address for the record please hello my name is nina blankenship and i live at 2131 rocky bluff court and i'm
here to defend our country's symbol of freedom the american bald eagle that is protected by the federal bald and golden eagle protection act and the migratory treaty act i have lived in novito since 1990 since 2021 i've seen the american bald eagle at the intersection of
lockwood in 419 the last time i saw the eagle was yesterday at their favorite hangout spot which is at the top of the power lines at publix and on lockwood right across from the walgreens according to sam peacock project manager from the city of ovido and responsible
for 781 lockwood stated that the 2022 environmental study cited hearing of eagles from the property at 781 lockwood harris burns development review manager of ovito and i spoke about another eagle sighting last week and he sent me the
2024 ecological assessment this assessment cited the ottabbon bird website the ottabbon is a nonprofit that relies on volunteers to self-report nests that are visible from public area areas and this ecological site assessment is not a true survey of the
land the study stated that because the ottabon website doesn't have an eagle's nest within the land therefore there are no eagles that's absolutely false and i was very saddened by the lack of diligence because i see eagles almost every day i often see an eagle couple flying around the land that is being
considered for construction thankfully i received drone footage of the land and identified an eagle on the land it is illegal to disrupt an american bald eagle while nesting and that includes driving a truck by the nest chopping down additional trees within 660 ft of
the nest and physically walking near the nest please survey the land to verify the location of the nest that is active from 7:00 a.m to 10:30 a.m instead of relying on inaccurate databases of the internet residents of ovito it is not enough to report an american bald eagle
while sitting on a power line or flying around we need to report all eagle's nest to the ottabon and fish and wildlife website to prevent distraction or interference of an american bald eagle please take pictures of all eagle's nest no one from the city of ovido and in documentation such as an
ecological city study um is acknowledging an american bald eagle living on this land at 781 lockwood this land is within the city limits of ovido and as a steward of this land it is your responsibility to ensure that the american bald eagles are protected and
that everyone complies with federal laws thank you thank you the next person is jennifer mcdonald please state your name and address for the record please sure it's jennifer mcdonald feedler to be full uh address is 1049 long branch lane and i live in
twin rivers off of lockwood um close to the golf course there anyway um traffic is i am opposed traffic is one of my largest concerns um if you'll recall you guys recently made it so we can turn two lanes turning left onto mitchell hammock
from lockwood which alleviated the long line that passed way past even my subdivision but definitely there um which resolved it if you turn left but now if you go straight it backs up past my subdivision at pipe times so what are
you going to do to solve that right and when you talk about people using uh the cars using the commercial property number one walmart's not going to go in there walmart is on a decline because of amazon so brick and mortar is not adding especially not adding in those areas
where it's not going to be favorable to them um so when you add about the cars for the commercial use i think you're using a scare tactic by using walmart um also those people who use commercial or us
what you're adding is additional people and again not opposed to additional people where they should be placed which yes is unused land what happened to macy's is it not a big enough profit for you because we surely cannot use more
cars and again the seinal study that says that these roads are not fully utilized are inaccurate we drive it every day it's busy all the time it's unreasonably busy at peak times and it
starts when you go to pick up your children and you go to pick up your children an hour before they get out so it starts at 2:00 um i would hope i read one time that when someone speaks such as us who by the way i've never been to a meeting in my life before we're
representing at one time they said 100 and likely today 200 because people don't come out and speak so you have a small population here represented but they're speaking for thousands thank you thank you next person i have is james
rutherford james rutherford 393 evening sky drive i'm on the hoa of uh river oaks uh i oppose this my main objection to it is that it's going to be 70 feet high i
don't know anywhere in ovido that's 70 ft high and to be out there in a basically conservation area with a 70 foot high building is just ridiculous thank you thank you once again i'll open if there's
anybody else that wishes to make a statement i'll keep it open for just another minute or two you can come up if you want to speak please state your name and address and then afterwards if you'll fill out a form please my name is lorraine williams i live at
695 evening sky um a couple years ago we had the flooding and um there's a creek that runs between lockwood and our street evening sky drive and it kind of winds around and it goes under the road and it goes off into the econ i had we
had rushing water coming up four feet on the building our back buildings during that storm and yes it went away and i don't think any unit was intruded but i'm the second building down from
where the water comes out the water on the first building was up more than 4 feet it was almost up to the patio area i'm concerned if you lay all that concrete for a five-story building and all those cars and whatever the pickle
courts and so on it sounds yeah i mean it's a good idea but yeah maybe the mall would be that area would be a better place for it i'm concerned about flooding where we are if more concrete is poured thank you thank you anyone
else at this time then i will close all public comments um did you want to come back up for a minute i'll be i just want to answer some of the questions uh for the record logan obsol again appreciate everyone's time uh really do
a lot of this you know we've we've heard and tried to speak to some of which was new um i'll be brief i' i was taking notes and just want to answer some of the things we've we've heard about um the consistency with the comprehensive
plan uh certainly can ex appreciate uh a disagreement over that i think the difference here is um the requirements you know to look at these types of proposed uses are consistency and and whether that's based
on a finding of of competent substantial evidence but also a outright consistency with your comprehensive plan and so broad sentiments related to it's not i think run counter to the way in which this proper this project was designed
and the actual actual specific citations to the objectives and policies you've seen by your staff with a conclusion that we are consistent with the comprehensive plan and i know as as volunteers of the city you spend a lot of time looking at these sort of items
and when we talk about things like height and i i understand and completely agree that this is you know it's higher um that is something that relates the compact development that was specifically contemplated in the
revisions to the comprehensive plan um and so that is uh intentional and allows for again that compact uh development that allows for the connectivity and speaking of connectivity we talk about that um i don't i'm not exactly sure
where the word overflow came from but there is cross access to the walgreens um and and south and east along 419 uh that's part of the overall uh poa requirements and there's old documents
that allow that cross access it also matches the goals and objectives of your comprehensive plan for connectivity so so it's it's absolutely true that that there is cross access to those areas and allow for additional access that equates to more uh traffic circulation and
safety efforts the esa you know notwithstanding being a land use attorney uh i love wild florida and we do have an environmental study uh that's been updated uh we would update it if
needed or required by the city i it's something we have to do um and would be the same if if true for whatever came in uh whether it be this 55 plus mixed use um or the commercial um and and yes the commercial there's lots of talk of the
commercial and i think certainly what's what's trying to be conveyed from our standpoint is just what's allowed uh you've heard from staff you've heard from us those are just the uses that's what's out there um it's not a scare tactic it's not a tactic it's it's what's out there and and i think a a
helpful bellweather when when contrasted with uh what's being proposed to a commercial uh use um and so i i do appreciate what we heard today i think some of them are are broad and and uh maybe deal with other portions of the
city and and and surrounding areas which are important uh considerations and uh our our goal our job you know our our requirement as an applicant is to take in front of us what the comprehensive
plan requires what the land development uh land development regulations require uh follow that process uh put together a sufficient application and uh work our best to get staff support which is what's in front of you based on again a
conclusion of consistency with your comprehensive plan um before i conclude and i just have one more remark to make and i'll be done if you'll indulge me just 20 seconds i do have a project engineer here that can speak to drainage um we the the way in which the
topography runs on that property and the drainage that's being contemplated for this uh development would preclude any sort of drainage or flooding into that area so brooks if you just give us just a quick rundown of of the drainage component yeah thank you evening brooks stickler
with kimley horn associates uh pe 200 south orange avenue so uh one of the concerns that was actually raised the last one regarding the flooding um if i believe the storm that she's referring to is the last hurricane that we had that was almost a thousand-year storm event so that thousand-year storm event
is not what anything is designed within the entire state of florida um even hospitals do not design to that level and the amount of rain that we've got and so there was flooding across all of central florida so it was great that her house did not flood but that is a an
outlier from the overall system storm water in the state of florida is changing there is rules that are in state law right now that are being adopted and that are actually being implemented starting december to hold back more storm water treat more
storm water and um increase low impact developments that is what actually the current rules are being pushed towards and that this development will have to meet and that is that all of the water that is running off of this site currently from lockwood to the east
towards the wetlands that's what's going there today we cannot let anything more go than what it is going today that is the state law we have to beat the city code for that and we have to meet the state law and we have to go through multiple permitting agencies to make
sure that that is met and there's factors of safety that are put on that on that as well that go above and beyond those requirements so that is some of the new laws in regarding the storm water requirements so this all the asphalt all the building yes it doesn't go into the ground but it goes into
these retention basins and ponds that we design to hold that water back and then slowly release it into the wetlands which goes into the river um to help feed those wetlands and to keep them alive
thank you thanks brooks uh i'll conclude now i i i again i i do appreciate the comments we heard i truly thank you for your time residents of the city and you know this is their home and and i think their points are are well taken
um we we have again before you a development that was very intentional and we i really want to thank your staff for how collaborative they've been uh we've worked through this process we've commissioned crash studies we've looked at the the traffic studies uh had more
reports we've had the esa we'll continue to comply with all our requirements because we have to uh but we uh are proud to have a conclusion and recommendation for consistency with the comprehensive plan on our request because they meet the goals and objectives of the city um again thank you for your time thank you for your
service and uh i didn't understand i'll answer any questions yeah i didn't understand what you said about the the um height you started out and you said it's 70 you know you understand the height and then you said something and i just didn't understand yeah sure so i i there's i my understanding is there's a
movement in the city especially within revisions to the comprehensive plan to allow more compact development and the way we do that to prevent urban sprawl is to do it in areas with already developed out and go up that allows for that preservation of wetlands
conservation open space as required by code and otherwise which account for in this case 44% of the overall development but specifically to your question the height uh although increased over what was previously approved is in line with the with the goals of the comprehensive plan to allow for that more compact
thank you for your question thank you thank you okay no sorry huh we can't ask questions he gets to come back up no thank you for your time democratic sorry that you had your opponents making
comments i'm trying to be ver i let everybody but you can't ask any questions now it's up to the board up here so just so we understand all of us up here are volunteers we live in your neighborhoods i live off of lockwood we all live so we all
understand your your plight okay so it's not that we don't get it we do but we also know what the guidelines are as well okay what is the pleasure of the board um i have
u another question that was that he addressed um about the 55 plus originally was just for one person in the household and they said is going to be changed to it has to be everyone in the household is that
currently because the information i have doesn't show that is that on the current has that been updated good evening theresa korea development service director so that's a good question that i already um posed myself because this is the first time we heard so if this is the case this should
be reflected in the development agreement so we would ask for that um clarification and mr chairman i was waiting to some for the questions from the board to come here and also address you know the questions that were raised by the residents and if i can i can do
that now or later you can do it now so i i would like to clarify and i i love public hearings because we hear you know uh we have this opportunity to hear from the community directly and an opportunity also for us to tell what we do so um staff is not committed to any
development is not commit committed to any uh we are committed to the city right and we are committed to the comprehensive plan the land development code and we um we when we receive an application our concern and commitment
is to give that application due process in a public hearing and this is the second public hearing before this board is an example of that right when we hear the community we had an opportunity also to have the community meeting um and i
hear that uh um um some residents were frustrated staff was also in a way surprised that the community didn't come with specific tangible you know um uh requests right um asking for no development is not a good you know
negotiation strategy but we understand you know the concerns and we have listed all the concerns so um on the comprehensive plan um this is an amendment so one of the ordinance is asking for an amendment to the comprehensive plan so yes the future land use what they are proposing today
is not compliant with the current comprehensive plan the future land use for that area but so when we received an application for a future land use amendment the staff's um uh job is to look at the impact of that development
and to see if the uh features if the qualities of the development are um supported by the policies of the comprehensive plan the comprehensive plan um gives the the general policies of the city so for instance um aging in
place communities for a lifetime is one of the policies um promoting diversity in housing typology is one of the policies um another policy is to promote um more compact mixeduse development and
yes it will be more vertical in the exercise of the comprehensive plan that we approve uh approved and in 2022 we have identified four growth areas in the city this was not a one of them but the fact that um we did not um identify that
area does not preclude an applicant to come and propose and when we analyze our proposal or the the new um request we analyze based on impact if traffic is a concern then this project is better than
the alternative and we are not trying to scare anybody it's just that at one point this this land will be developed we don't know with bot these were you know staff was trying to make some simulations right but yeah it will be
developed and today the entitlements that they have by right is the 99 something thousand square ft of commercial so this is not this is not something that if an applicant comes tomorrow it will not require a public
hearing so the staff was not trying to scare anybody was just trying to be transparent of what are the entitlements today just to clarify yes the height is being proposed to change and that is in the pud it's not a matter height is not a matter of the comprehensive plan the
pud is a zoning that does not have um um standards in the lc the standards are negotiated and they are proposing a different pud and is in the in this pud they are increasing the height but again this is compliant with general policies
of the comprehensive plan we know that we will not be able to continue to develop sprawling right as we did in the past with the low um density residential development uh we will have to have more
vertical development to be sustainable so that is that is best practice today so that is why this development kind of matches you know the policies of the comprehensive plan but not the one citiz i i you know i want to keep this a
very civil but but you can't speak up that portion of the meeting is now over i'm not trying to be mean or rude it's just the way this is the way it runs so and and to that point mr chairman um
the residents now have the public hearing is closed but residents can reach out to staff and i have volunteered myself and my staff many times if residents have questions they can reach out to staff to have the questions answered and we are available
to answer any questions uh on the eagle um uh matter i would like david mack and if he we have our environmental consultant here he can speak on that uh let me see if i oh on the macy's why we didn't repurpose um other structures in
the city i think it's a great idea but the city um is not the applicant is not the property owner so we cannot propose we can entertain an application if someone wants to repurpose and we have you know um uh an application for you
know the redevelopment of macy's but again the role of the city is not to develop right the role of the city is to approve and review development and based on you know the policies that we have the comp plan and the ldc
i think um i think that's all i have for now but i just wanted to u make those points and and say again that we are available if residents have questions after this meeting okay oh i i do have one one question may i ask a question what's
that may i ask a question yeah please okay so you um there was a comment that came up and you just touched on it just now um with a possibility or why haven't we
entertained the idea of a different location right um and i would say to the developers is it is is it in your is it your primary
motivation to be in that location or to build the property i'm i'm basically what i'm asking and forgive me for my ignorance
there is a lot a lot other spaces that potentially i don't know if they could be used but could there be some negotiation between the city and the developers in that way so that's a good question and i think it's it's it clarifies a lot on our role the city
doesn't own property to negotiate right we we respect property rights so we review applications that are submitted to us and and you have to prove that you're a property owner or you have the authorization of the property owner to provide you know a proposal for the
development of that land so the city has no no role in negotiating and exchanging property that's not what we do right so i'm we we would entertain you know an application for the redevelopment of
other areas and the property owners can you know exchange land if they want but it's not it's not our function and we cannot dictate you know you go there you come here we follow um property rights but that could be something that could
be negotiated between two property owners but it's not at stake today right so you would have to talk to the to the owners it's not it's not part of our application or our review understand thank you
i was just curious is there um does it matter that it's a 55 and over other than the fact that it doesn't have that impact on the schools and there has been some sort of exemption so it has also impact on traffic and i i
think our um um transportation uh consultant kwan can say about that um it is a pro product that we do not have in the city so we would like to have a a product that caters for that community um so that people people are aging you
can stay in the city if you want to move and downsize and not be a property owner anymore and and rent you know in an apartment um and there is the the fact that it does not um impact schools either so the the
impact is less than a regular multifamily um uh complex if if that if that product doesn't isn't successful and doesn't sell
units would the next would it be possible to then change it into a residential they would have a regular without without that restriction they will have to come through the same process because again a pud the standard is negotiated
so if in the da it states that it's for a 55 uh plus community if they want to change that they will have to come back through the same process so it's going to be a reszoning um and come for a public hearing to remove that the
project in the in the mall um did not did not go through so they stopped it they it was not that they were approved they built and they changed it there was a proposal for a 55 plus community in in
uh in in where macy's is and that project did not uh was not developed so a new proposal was replaced this one um if they change they would have to come
um again before this board and before city council to amend the development agreement okay thank you you're welcome okay what's the pleasure report for discussion we have to have a motion before we can
discuss go ahead do i have to say all the numbers and everything i'd like to proceed with a motion for ordinance number 1754 comprehensive plan future land use map amendment for arya
at ovido mixeduse development from low density residential to mixed use you can do them both yeah in addition the um motion for ordinance number 1755 zoning map amendment for the area at
ovito planned unit for discussion can i m you you need to say you make a motion oh i make a motion correct second it just correct the record m since you made the motion you have the floor first okay you need a second he
got one from yeah there was a second [Music] um so i'd like to mr hall i'd like you to help explain to everybody here about the function of the lpa and the position on the board
what what authority we have and don't have in terms of these immediate concerns that are going on the the the the position and the authority of this board and then the function of this board in this particular instance is to
consider the ordinance being presented and to recommend to city council whether or not these ordinances are approved or denied and and and you're allowed to ask questions uh in investigative questions or of the applicant u you know we can't
get into discussions of should it go someplace else or whatever that's not the function the function is to consider consider u the evidence presented to you uh and the discussion and so forth and determine uh you're really you're this these are two separate functions the
comp plan amendment is a quai legislative function in which the standard is more of a reasonleness if if it's not as much subject to challenge uh as if it's re if a reasonable person would say okay that makes sense let's do it or no that doesn't make sense do it
then um then the second part is reasonzoning which is equitial and that uh is a very definite standard you have to have substantial competent evidence to either deny or approve and and the position of this
board is you're going to recommend approval or denial of each of these ordinances based on the what you've heard tonight and based on your review of the of what's been presented to you and could you also help clarify who has
the most authority in authorizing this project to move forward or not uh that'd be city council city council makes the ultimate decision the council will decide and they they they of course city council wants from you a recommend wants
from this body a recommendation along with probably a reason or a reason a reasoning why you so if you elect to say we think this should be denied you need to tell city council why in this board collective
appeals should be denied or if it's approved why you think it should be approved so you're you're a recommending body to the city council and you need to tell them the reasons why you either approved you either recommend approval or recommend denial so they can take
that into their consideration they are the ultimate decision makers on this okay mr d um i'm going to go back to what i originally stated before
um in reference to the 55 plus as it stands now it's just one person in there it needs to be i would say i'd want it denied just for that um as the information the new information that was brought is not what's
currently on the docket so that would need to be changed um and i appreciate everybody coming out and voicing uh you know their thoughts i think that's really important and a lot of
food for thought but right now i i i think it needs to be redone and uh that's that's all i got mr chairman can i just ask what part needs what were you saying needs to be changed
it was the 55 plus as it stands now it's one person in the household and as you spoke they were going to change it to it had to be 55 plus or both all residents all residents okay for for inhale inhabitants of the
apartment is that an amendment do you want them to include that language prior to going to city council correct okay so we can recommend that on our so you're going to have to amend the motion right we can get there
when that time comes well yeah okay mr bryant thank you for entertaining my question i asked it purposefully [Music] um yeah i'm very concerned about if we were to make a recommendation to deny
and what could be developed and it could end up having a a greater negative impact and then what's before us right now and we're a recommended body so um you know i'm really concerned about
the concern i'm really concerned about what i'm hearing about traffic um and i'm not exactly certain have we done all that we could do to
mitigate these traffic concerns that people anticipate on the horizon um [Music] uh do i have to make a recommendation right now no no i mean if you want to make another motion to amend something
of the current motion it's up to you i mean we'd have to go back and forth and do all of that right now the there's one amendment that needs to be reapproved for making all the inhabitants of each apartment 55
plus that mr uh recommended so miss hunt would have to accept the amended uh and then mr would have to also agree to the amendment and then if there's anything else we can do that as well mr chairman yes it's is it okay if um because it
sounds like you have a question so if you want to ask that of our transportation consultant yes is that okay it is a question sure please yes so there were some concerns about that left coming out of the community and it being
so close to the intersection almost 600 ft if i heard that correctly and that is going to that's that seems to be uh causing some deep consternation like there's going to be some backup and
i recognize how we calculate traffic we're not going to do that again but we know and um so a after uh for the record kwan ma 225 east robinson street orlando 32801 um after the uh community meeting
um i was contacted by staff and uh it a number of uh concerns were brought up with respect to transportation um i provided uh some recommendations uh to be passed along to the applicant uh
those recommendations included um creating a uh better redesigning the intersection where the publix comes out and where this project comes out to better delineate traffic to better manage
speeds um and to provide um a more guided flow of traffic because right now it's a a lot of it is unmarked unstriped and it has um it's very open and so uh
what you see on the screen it is the result of that in order to try and um uh improve the situation that's out there uh second uh uh request that i that we made was to uh look at the the crash
data for uh the surrounding area we were told that there um were some uh crash concerns including a um a fatality at on uh county road 419 at the easternmost um
entrance to the commercial site uh so uh the city had asked the applicant to provide a crash analysis um and uh to uh also provide um a comparison of the the
trip generation so that it was understood what the um comparatively speaking what the impacts are between the um proposed development and uh potential developments thank you for that how how are your recommendations received
uh spoke to the applicant um traffic consultant and uh my understanding and what i've seen um from the submittals uh and presentations is that they have provided everything that was that was requested
uh they have um shown they're showing uh a redesign of the entrances into the site um to improve traffic flow and uh it was indicated that at least where
their traffic would be interfacing at lockwood there there is not a um there is not a critical crash rate that uh that would exceed uh the um the safety standards
thank you you good yes mr hul just really grateful to no questions for you i'm sorry thank you just really grateful to to see community members come out and and voice their concern and uh just so we can hear from a wide swath of the population a
lot of that was what was brought up was some of my concerns as well uh i'm i was april 1st when i realized i'm two years away from my golden years and um i have children that are school age so if i was to buy a resident uh unit
there i would add to the seino county school uh schools district i would add to the uh the traffic as well um i'm not opposed to the to the development uh somebody was upset when my house was built in 1972 in ovido uh i'm not
opposed to development my my always my big concern always with this project was the location on that on that uh across from publix that entrance way uh that location at lockwood at 419 where i take my daughter to school every
day um so i i noted that the that semino county granted an exemption uh for the school impact based on the 55 plus i like i said i if i was to buy a unit there tomorrow i i would add two children to that school district so i don't i don't buy that
um but i i i think like i said all my my questions have been answered from the developer all my uh i've heard the feedback from the community and i i have nothing no amendment to add to to that okay thank you okay um i love the history lesson that
was really good um the fact the research you had to do to find that and tell us all about that i think was was really good um traffic is a concern but traffic as we know is not one that we can really work with because we have to follow the seminal county rules and i certainly understand that and i know there was a
chuckle about driving you know at 10 p.m 10 a.m and 2 p.m i've made it from i live i work in that area i've made it to the mall down mitchell ham and not hit a traffic light and i've been amazed that i've done that but it has happened so just to let you know that sort of thing can't happen and to be honest i like the
project um i think we do need those sort of things but my concern is and no one's mentioned it yet up here is the comp plan we spent a lot of time putting together the comp plan where we wanted the higher density things and this was not it okay you know even though i hear
what you said that it's it's commercial it was owned commercial and that 9.62 acres already the surrounding areas are low density which is four but when we go to mixed use and i you know although it's mixed use it's not like when i look at the ellington over here where it's all the ground floors are commercial and
you have residential up above it this one is 6200 square ft of commercial in one little corner of it and i think we're doing that to make it fit the mixed use parameter for lack of a better term um that's just my opinion maybe that's not correct but that's my opinion
on that so i disagree that it fits in with the comp plan today and i just don't think this is the area for that the areas by the mall someone talked about repurposing we can't as as you said we can't repurpose but other people can bring that to us but we can't do
that but i just don't think there's an area for it and i don't think it fits in with the comp plan that we spent lots of time and long meetings going over it deciding where we wanted the higher density properties and this is not it
miss ramsey um you know it's hard because what you're pointing out was that we've had this happen over and over again throughout history that you know people are usually against something new coming in and you know worried about traffic
and we've we've adapted and changed and that's part of progress and obviously a 55 and up community seems like a great um addition and it it seems like really great as far as being able to walk to publix and walgreens and
having you know being being able to age and have a place where it's walkable there's not a lot of places in obito where you can do that so i mean i understand that i i just i just don't yeah i agree with you like we did spend a lot of time working on this and it
seems like if that doesn't matter or if that isn't sort of there for a reason well what do we i'm not really sure why we're here if all we're going to do is just kind of go okay sure whatever like let's you know approve
whatever comes in you know it just feels it feels a little bit like i'm not sure why we need our body or or or the rule in general and then i'm just worried also that it's
going to change i mean if that doesn't work out you know it's just it's there's going to be another change i and that's maybe that's just the way that the world works and it's just going to be change i mean a developer comes in and knows how they're going
to use that property i mean whoever owns that property knew what they were buying when they bought it so i mean i don't know if that it just didn't go anywhere and then now there's just a a new idea and i'm sure you guys know and would tell me but my feeling is
just i'm not sure what the rule is for and you know if there is a a reason for changing you know i just haven't seen i haven't seen it either i mean it seems like a good project but the area
obviously is a concern for all of the residents here it's hard to look at the residents and and go "well it doesn't really matter because you know you're here and you're upset but none of that matters because it's a property owner and they get to do what they want with their property." except they can't
really do what what they want with their property because they're here so i i don't i just at this point i don't see what what i don't see why we should vote for it um and maybe there's some something that
can be done to but i can't tell you what it is i can't tell you what he can do to make it better um but i do think that the concerns of this community are important sorry all right well my two cents worth
is that um as people know me being up here for a couple years and we've had our battles between me and the uh traffic consultant numerous times i also don't agree with the seminal counties way they do count i do know that that
intersection there trying to cross from walgreens to publix is is very very dangerous you know extremely um you know i made a comment to someone that perhaps we do a roundabout but that would be at the cost of the city uh extremely
expensive to keep the traffic flowing in that area um do i like the project sure it's uh you know i'm probably the most senior person up here i am a senior citizen um so i do like the 55 idea um some people mentioned the mall so most
of you don't know the mall is actually owned by three individuals and none of them get along okay maybe two get along a little bit better than the third for lack of another word and there has been numerous fights between them to do whatever they want to do in that mall yeah i would
agree it would be a more suitable location to put it without a doubt but we can't tell a developer where he can do what he can't do a land owner i don't know if i can mention this or not that piece of the parcel that we're talking about tonight a couple years back there
was a charter school that went in was going to go in the board city council denied it and it cost the city $4 million in fines okay think about that for a
moment that's out of our taxpayers dollars that didn't go into the city coffers we used it for something else i need you to all to understand that what staff has said in the currently tonight is that this is now
zoned currently for c1 yes there's low density classifications but it's really zoned for c1 any commercial property can go in there it you say it's fine today those that are saying yes it's fine when they build it you're not going to be fine about it you're going to be
complaining about it this is going to give you a lower traffic count i agree the traffic you know it's not accurate it's not even closely remote i personally would like to see a complete median so that you can only make a left out of the walgreens i mean a right out
of the walgreens and a left from publix so that you cannot get across that way i know that's would put a burden on some people but it would be a safer environment as well you would have to turn around into the neighborhood ma'am i we've had our time i'm just i'm just
expressing my opinion we had all you had you all you all had your time and this is what i'm saying all right so this so we have an amendment miss hunt do you accept the amendment to require that all of the apartment be 55
plus yes okay do you accept the amendment as well mr even though you made it okay all right is there any other further discussion make that decision i i could just make a statement am i allowed to you could yeah absolutely
ultimately this decision is going to have to be made by the city council the individuals you elect that sit up here twice a month um i believe we have one in the room today and they're ultimately going to be making a decision about whether this
moves forward or not this is just a recommending body to the council to move forward with a decision i think at this point we met in january now we're looking at april 1st
so this gives you the opportunity if we move forward with this to go directly to the city council and have this discussion and there will be two hearings at city council will be this way we can move forward with this and there's going to
be a decision made and there's no more sitting in l you know a gray area waiting and that can you specify just what that means for next steps like how do we can you be a little bit more specific with what that means and maybe not
so let me clarify um after the decision today if the board reached the decision today we have scheduled for the 21st um the first reading it's not a public hearing okay c residents can come and
and follow the the conversation um but it's not um an advertised public hearing it's going to be a a first reading of the both ordinances the first the public hearing is on may 5th and that will be
advertised and um and the residents will receive the notice that's when they can speak up that's a public hearing yes they will have you know the opportunity to you know provide their comments and uh and again if they reached out to us everything that we
received is part of the correspondence that goes to the packet as well and just for clarification this is a commercial property this is zoned this is a today is zoned as pud and has the entitlements are the
entitlements of a c1 c1 uses so uses aligned with c1 and an additional um uses um so a restaurant is there i think in our presentation we um um detailed and we have in the in the powerpoint but
yes it's a commercial property today yes i mean for us just to just to clarify when we vote whether it's a yes or no even if it's a no it's still going to city council we do not recommend that they approve it is all it's saying it's not saying that we're not going to forward it on to city council it's still
going to them one way or the other well this application will go to city council city council is the approving authority yes we're not a no vote here doesn't say it's not going to it dies here it doesn't go on it does still go on no you're just recommending body yes exactly yeah very good clarification and
that is governed by the florida statutes the florida statutes you as the local planning agency has a a role um the florida statute requires you to make a recommendation to the governing body governing body is city council so you're just a recommending body on the comp
plan as well as the zoning regarding that does that mean they all make one dec i'm asking are you all one voice on a recommendation or you make your individual recommendations we're all one voice so if we recommend it then we
recommend it if we deny it then we have to give them a reason for the denial and it has to be legitimate denial reason we just can't say we don't like it because of traffic that that's not legal that would bring a lawsuit almost instantly
to every one of us on this board we would be liable for it so we have to have the right justifications to deny it to go to you know to re to recommend it in denial okay uh mr chairman suggestion um based
on the comments u i've heard we may want to when you take your final vote consider the ordinances separately because there will be a recommend there will be a recommendation on each one so so recommendation on this one and that
one right this one and that okay so i have my you recommend ordinance number 1754 as okay which one this one we do this one first one okay
and then you're going to take a vote mhm okay so recommending ordinance number 1754 comprehensive plan future land use map amendment for area at ovido mixeduse development from low density residential
to mixed use c1 c1 yeah mixed juice mu mud mud you're good you're on you're who's the second iter who's going to second it
second mr cav okay so we'll call the motion all those in favor of ordinance 17 54 54 say i i all those opposed no no okay
no okay who said move we can't move forward now we got to decide why we're not going to recommend it correct mr hall you should you should state a reason why yes yes for me it's the land use it's not doesn't fit in the comp
plan okay that should be suitable enough for me what's that that's suitable enough for me you worked on the comp plan i'm going say the comp plan comp plan comp plan what i mentioned before sure comp plan okay so effect you're not
recommending a change to the current comp plan effectively that would be because it's currently you're not re you're not you're recommending that no change be made to the to the future land use correct correct destination on the comp plan okay yes so there's really no need to take a vote on the second one no
you still have to do a you still have to do a uh okay a recommendation on the second one okay so um how do i in a motion let me just make a motion for you so a motion for ordinance number 1755 zoning map
amendment for the area at ovidto plan unit second all those in favor say i all those opposed say no no okay now you do have to provide substantial competent evidence right so you have to you have
to have a reasoned decision for that comprehens [Music] oh i thought you meant doesn't adhere to it how can we how can it fit one and not the other i mean it doesn't well you run in a situation
council may elect to approve the change the if council elects to approve the change in use of the the future the comp plan then they also have to separately consider the the zoning map amendment so they need a recommendation you on if
you're okay with the zoning change realizing the your recommendation comp if if council says yes we we're okay with the comp plan change then they need recommendation do you on going from on the zoning change yeah but as it sits now it's not comp or
zoning correct so i mean if we say no because of zoning yeah we're going from well we're going pdp so if if so the question would be if if this
uh body is okay with uh the property if it were if if the comp plan amendment were approved um then they have presented a planned unit development which differs from the current thing which commercial
plan use would be a mixeduse it's a mixed use with a with a residential and and a commercial component that would be the the reasonzoning requested so if if that that's this the board will need the the council will need a recommendation on that portion as well okay yeah then
then council would have to change the comp plan and zoning yep correct right but we still have to give him a good reason for the not changing the zoning well i'm not changing the zoning because if i'm not changing the comp plan the first one doesn't go through so it's
kind of like a point but what you're saying is if they change the comp plan then it would either have to come back to us for the zoning because no they'll need a recommendation from you they will want the recommendation on that phase on that ordinance of it on that phase of it well the way you're putting it i guess
if they are going to make a decision to approve a change to the comp plan it stands to reason that they're probably going to change the zoning also but i would disagree with it because i don't think we should change the comp plan so i don't think we should change the zoning either if that makes sense
i don't know that it makes sense but we are based with where we are there are two ordinances one changes comp plan one changes effectively changes zoning his bud uh and if if council would have the right to approve the comp plan amendment
they would still then like to have a reasoning from this council whether or not from this board whether or not they should approve the result going from pud now to commercial to basically commercial residential so i i guess i
would say you know if you say we don't want any if we don't want anything that's not a good substantial like i said this is the the the reasoning is equitial hearing and you have to have substantial comp evidence to say no
effectively you can't competent substantial evidence we have to have compet substantial evidence to say no or they have to have compet substantial evidence it's of the opposite it's up to the developer to
prove their case and if they do which i think they have because they've shown the the area and the the traffic and so on and so forth and this board to say no we don't accept that we don't think the traffic is right you know all those accepted standards and so forth so we we
don't think that is good for the character of the area or whatever but we have it can't be just an opinion wouldn't the best way to go is to approve it with strict recommendations to the council to
address this issue when it gets to them this would be a if if you say okay if the council says okay we're going to make the thing this would be where if you want to put in the condition that we recommend approval with the condition that it only be 55 plus completely you
have probably more authority than trying to come up with a reason why the zoning um is not following the law because they everybody's follow we feel like yeah you can say we feel like the developer made their made there enough a case that if
if the land use plan were changed that the development can go forward and and so you can actually recommend approval subject to conditions like like i think you mentioned the all 55 which which developer talked about right um you get
so or you can just say you know yeah so it it's it's kind of tricky because we're quite legislation quite judicial and their standards are different i mean i can't simply say i don't agree with it because of what the current zoning is and that's my reasoning for saying no
and then that takes it to council and council says okay then we will change the zoning and then at that point they move forward because that's a reason for me to say no if i don't feel like you know the zoning as it currently the
problem is open up the city to to challenge by the developer and and what mr lopez talked about is the litigation that we just lost right u and it it opens up the city to more challenge it gives the developer better chance to challenge us so could could we approve
with um recommendations is that possible you can prove with with stipulations stipul stipulations yeah let's go in that direction that's probably the easiest way to go let's go in that direction we're going to sit here all night trying to figure out what's what reason is going to give us the judicial u aspects
of it right all right so who wants to make the motion with the stipulations mr devote are the stipulations you want to do it i make a motion with the stipulations but you going to have to state what the stipulations are um all of us all of them
i think my concern was with the stipulations that they take a look at the traffic patterns again around there around around that intersection and congestion can i say that that's a fairly dangerous because we're we're
doing the siminal standards which which we can't we can't the system with similar i mean like i said i've gone round and round with our our consultant many years i have a suggestion that's an issue i would recommend that the city council
um meet with the residents and the developer in nailing out a better plan no prior no no we can't do that no with the council the city council no we can't
commit to council nope you can't do that no no that would be up to council to do that they're the ones that can do that okay so you just you're just saying vote for it so no no i'm not i'm saying i'm saying no we need to give a reason be
consensus as to what stipulation we want it just can't be traffic and it can't be just because we don't want it so the stipulation so the stipulation what you're saying is for this particular one for zoning is they would have to approve the first one the comp plan amendment first that's correct before you could do
this right right but i'm saying we have to consider the possibility they may approve it i don't know we haven't we haven't talked about it all but that that's it is it is two separate ordinances uh so it requires two separate action so council
may deny it and in which case then there's it's done there's no more but if council were to accept it then this body needs to make a recommendation on the resouring portion of it which is a quiz judicial decision which has a different we need to make recommendation to approve i apologize
for being make it make it tricky but uh we just have to protect the city so so so going back should we how do we do i strike anything from a previous motion so the first the motion has already failed so we have to make another motion yeah this will be the motion for 1755
correct which is the reasoning so we have to make another motion and if we want to put any stipulations or recommendations this is the time to do it correct yes right mr hall that's correct okay so i'll make a motion for recommendation of approval of what is
the number 17 1755 555 and the stipulation is that they would have to have changed the comp plan in 1754 first to give them the leeway to make you don't you don't need that stipulation if they don't change it
exact that's the whole point the whole stipulation is they have stipulation would be one thing would be to make it all 55 all residents have 55 five as gentleman said if that's if that's what you mr hall we i we couldn't we couldn't hear you the last oh sorry yeah i mean
to put that stipulation in that it has to be approved is is no reason to because if the reason if the comp plan amendment is not changed then this never gets considered so we have to we have to address if the comp plan amendment is
approved what do you recommend council does does at that point [Music] d i'm making myself clear i'm sorry yeah you made yourself clear it's like we're stuck in the middle of the sketch 22 because i'm going with the first one
that i don't agree with it it's a great project just not there that's that's my point um but i don't understand why we have to only because it's on the page here but i mean if if they don't approve the first one the second one is a moot point so right but they they might approve the first one they might approve
the first so they need a recommendation because our so your best you probably probably our best argument our best avenue is is stick with our vote 1754 re a new motion for 1755 the developer technically legally
is what you're what you're saying we have to have a legal avenue developer the developer has legally checked all the blocks yep correct right right i mean your argument about traffic is great but they've checked semino county has conducted the study uh so reread uh
motion on 1755 and stick with your vote on 1754 and that's just conversation that's not my recommendation is that your motion you want to make that motion yeah i'll make a motion
to approve ordinance 1755 zoning m amendment to area at ovito plan unit development a second perfect seeing no other further discussion i don't think all those in favor say i i'm sorry um 1755 does that include the
conditions the only condition they spoke of and if you want to add i'll add the condition was the 55 plus all residents 55 plus uh was the condition we spoke of if you want to add that as part of the amendment if i can add one to that motion so just to add one other thing so the
1755 i just want to make sure i'm clear if 1754 is not approved by them then this doesn't matter correct correct but if they approve 1754 they want to know what so 754 is the 55 plus for both
parties compliment department is the compliment 54 right so we have to put the 55 on the on the 55 or the 54 55 condition go 55 yeah cuz the 55 the zoning lost my numbers the
zoning is the is the development agreement that's where we put the language that's right so you have my you have my motion chair mr chairman and i don't know if anyone seconded a second second okay all those in favor say i i i all those opposed say
nay thank carries thank you all right moving on ordinance uh 1756 amendments to the land development code article 14 sign sections 14.10 temporary signs
is staff ready for that one yes thank you mr chairman it will it will go quick unless you want to take a break for a fiveminute break we can do that if you want to take a fiveminute break sure all right let's do that what's the point of
[Music] legally valid [Music] we did it first [Music] to make [Music] sure you guys
yeah and people forget once when you're coming on lock when you're on 419 and you cross you're coming 45 to 50 it's actually still 55 once you cross that you're still 45 you don't come to 35
until you pass three okay so you pass all of that and then you get to 35 okay so it's like that's why they get so many tickets out there because people just are coming 55 and they continue 55 and they get to the school district 55 and
so they forget it goes 55 to 45 to 35 but they don't do that wow this is amazing [Music] turns inside change and you don't see you don't need to have a reason that's
right it's that way that however all right but i'm going to walk over there right now and get the rest of my stuff thank you sorry excuse
[Music] me right right yeah yeah that you choose oh yeah a lot of people say that people [Music]
she was like you were able to time thank you very much but you still anything you put in one of the things on the [Music] you already know
[Applause] my dog i made it i made it but i was [Music] thinking if they know your name right i talked to me on that they wouldn't
know what to right growing up one of the leaders of my scout troop was the director of services and all that time i had no idea where i knew that he was the county it's just
anyway there's there's a lot more story to that he he's an amazing guy he died very young actually he died he didn't have a lab i just wanted to introduce myself to you just send her email and see if she
wants to check yeah you bet you bet oh yeah all right i'll catch you okay it's 9:02 we'll resume the next item is the ordinance 1756 amendment to
the land development code article 14 sign sections temporary signs mr pierre thank you mr chairman this is a request for the local planning agency to recommend approval of ordinance 1756 which are amendments to the land
development code article 14 section 14.10 temporary signs um campaign signage has been a recurring um topic of discussion as most of you know during the election cycle so it prompted city council to have a work session on um
campaign signs so on february 24th um city council held a work session to evaluate the current regulations governing campaign signs um following the discussion city council directed staff to propose amendments to the land development code to address concerns
raised during the discussion so these revisions are um as a result of the work session um so if you look at the first section um which is um 1410 temporary signs
um the staff added um to the table 14.10.1 10.1 i'm just going to walk you through the staff report really quickly so the underlined language is what we added um to the table which is already provided for in the language in the land
development code but we in the original table just had a summary and not every word for word that's in the land development code so we were afraid that it would conflict um the table would conflict with the language later in the code so we decided to just mirror the
language that's in the land development code that's um table 14101 the second thing that we did was to um 1410h we had in our code um campaign signs and free speech um signs were
combined so what we did was we separated free speech signs from campaign signs so in k i'm sorry and f under free speech you'll see that we struck through campaign signs um we removed that language anything related to campaign
signs we removed number and the third thing that we did was we um created a new campaign sign section in the le development code so that was new and the other new thing that we did was we are now allowing campaign signs to be
located in the public rightway um on the property where the polling um stations are the polling places are so that's new as well um so we're allowing that so that changes in k um in the underlying version and then we just created in that
table 1411 just um standards for campaign signs so this concludes um staff's presentation it is recommended that the local planning agency recommend adoption of ordinance summer number 15 1756 to
the city council i have a question are the fees staying the same the fees are have not been adjusted in this i would like to see that adjusted to to just one fee for all the signs like seminal county and orange county so
the fee is not in the land development code it is actually a separate resolution that's done once a year um we can certainly take that as a suggestion yeah i would follow all the other res at least this county doesn't just one sign
orange county is just one permit for all the signs for all campaign signs administrative yes it's an administrator that would be contained in administrative fee code which is adjusted each year so so we we will recommend council members here that
that but we will also take a look at that because we look at that each year i have a question it says um under k campaign signs number two campaign signs on private property shall be removed
within 5 days after the election has taken place um that's in neighborhoods as well i'm assuming of single family homes mhm and so how do they enforce that i'm just curious how does that go does somebody from the city drive around and find people
so we do have code enforcement um campaign signs we typically don't really enforce bother with the private property if it's in the right away we will remove it um but if it is on private property and it is a campaign sign and it's been there for a while we do have regulations
where we could enforce it or if someone calls someone calls that is correct i don't know that's sensible i don't think it's necessary personally that's just my own personal opinion
i think if you you want somebody's campaign sign up in your front yard for as long as you want you should have it hoa so just a clarification this is not only for um small signs so these are for large signs as well so we have large
signs in in commercial properties okay and and the city doesn't go there and fine they we you know if they violate the code we will send a notice of violation requesting the person to remove the sign but we would usually we would would not do that for small signs
in in people's yards it's just the the larger signs i think voluntarily people would remove those signs if not i think would be considered free speech you know so we would usually we that's not our concern the smaller signs in in in in in front yards and of course this wouldn't
apply to vehicles private property such as vehicles right you like bumper stickers yep no it does not apply it does not apply to just asking anybody anybody else has questions on the sides
seeing none i will call a vote all those in favor i have a motion no that's right we got to have a motion someone trying to get carried away it's right here on page yeah we didn't get sheets this time around 149
i'm not mentioning any names here here wait a minute yeah that's it here y there it's right there i make a motion to adopt ordinance number 1756 amendments to land development code
article 14 signs section 14.10 10 temporary signs the motion needs to re the motion needs to me recommend what's that recommend the recommend city council yeah yeah second okay any com any
discussion seeing none all those in favor say i i all those opposed say nay motion passes all right that takes care of that uh discussion items anybody want to discuss
anything no um for our two new board members um i guess this was the firing squad so to speak uh future meetings uh april 15th do we have one for april 15th i i got an email notice for april 20th yeah we moved that to the may 6th
meeting oh it's already right yes thank you there was an email that came out they wanted to have a meeting april 29th april 29th and i asked them if we could just do it the following week which is the normal week uh normal meeting date
so and it's not a big item right it's going to be your first be the first um mother-in-law your first 80 oh i'm going to be gone that day all right anything else no all right i
get we are adjourned thank you everyone thank you thank you that was fun [Music] you too good night see you see you see you cannot complete