Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. The April 16th, 2026 hearing for the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission is now called to order. And if I could please have everyone silence
any audible devices that you may have. And if you would please join me for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all for all. >> Good morning everyone. I would like to thank you for being here this morning. And um Miss Tucker, could I please have >> Thank you. Good morning members. Member Craig >> here. >> Member Shelley >> here. Member Costa >> here, >> member Bush >> here,
>> member Sixma >> here, >> chair Mills >> here, >> and member Erison is absent. >> Okay, thank you, Miss Tucker. We do have minutes from the February 19th, 2026 meeting and March 19th, 2026 meeting. Any discussion on those meeting minutes?
>> You want to put them both together? >> Yeah, we can do both of them. >> Okay. I'll make a motion for approval for minutes for February 19th and March 19th meetings. The minutes to be approved. >> Second. >> I've got a motion from Mr. Sikmith to
approve the minutes from February 19th, 2026 and March 19th, 2026. And a second for Miss Shelley. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Any motion carries unanimously.
Okay. If anyone would like to speak for against any of the cases being heard today, if you could fill out a form at the back of the dis here and give it to Miss Tucker to my immediate left. Uh we will be limiting you to a threeminut time limit. After the comments have been heard, I will give the applicant an
opportunity to address any concerns the speakers have and answer any questions the commissioners may have. And at this time, I'd like to turn it over to Mr. Sora for legal comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And this is for uh applicants and members of the public that uh decisions by this body on cases which reszone real
property from one classification to another pursuant to the zoning ordinance are recommendations only to the county council and do not constitute a final hearing. New evidence may be introduced at the county council public hearing. Decisions on variances and special exceptions made by this body constitute
final action subject to an appeal to county council. And what this means is that no new evidence may be presented at the time of the county council public hearing on the appeal. An agrieved party that appeals such a decision is confined to the record made before this body. Hearings on by this body on reasonzonings, special exceptions and
variances are quasi judicial in nature, meaning that this body is acting more like a court and must take into account all oral, written or demonstrative evidence presented. Their decisions on these cases must be based on competent substantial evidence in the record and comp substantial evidence has been
defined as that evidence a reasonable mind would accept to support a conclusion. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Mrs. Sorio. While on legal comments, I would like to ask the commission to disclose for the record any exparte communications that have occurred before or during the public hearing at which a vote is to be taken
on any quasi judicial matter. And I'll start with Mrs. Craig to my right. >> I have none. >> None. >> None. I have um one I have had discussions on CPA 24-007 and PUB24-012
with uh applicant Mark Watts >> and I have none. >> Okay, we do have a request I think from Mr. Shams for continuance on V26039. >> Yes, that's correct. Uh the applicant has requested to continue the item. Uh
we're recommending the June 18th meeting. Um they are here if you have any questions. >> Okay. >> All right. Anyone would like to make a comment or a motion or >> I'll make a motion. >> Okay. >> That we continue case number V-26-039
at the request of the applicant to the June 18th PLDRC meeting. >> Second. I got a motion on the floor to that we continue V26039 to our meeting in June the 18th from Miss Shel and a second from Mr. 6. May
any discussion on the motion? >> All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Motion carries unanimously. Okay, we do not have any unfinished old business. So, we're going to move right into our new business. So, Miss Shelly, could I
get the first case, please? Yes, sir. Case number V-26-035. Variances to separate non-conforming lots into the minimum yard requirements on Ostein cluster residential OCR zoned property.
>> Thank you, Miss Shel. Miss Shams, Mr. Shams, this is yours. >> Hi, good morning. Uh, the applicant's proposing five variances for the development of a single family home. The site is a non-conforming lot as it's approximately 5280 square ft and it's
zoned OCR and Ostein. It's comprised of the underlying lots three and four of block 4 in the Aurora Heights subdivision. In 2004, it was part of an approved lot combination to combine lots 1 through 48. However, this
was never mapped and the owner at the time sold all the lots individually. Now all adjacent lots have different owners. A non-conforming lot letter was provided by the applicant and found common ownership with all adjacent parcels that are out of their ownership
which you can see on the screen in blue. Therefore, the first variance is to separate them. Uh variances two to five are to reduce the minimum yard requirements. OCR has five subd designations 1 through five that correspond to density and lot size. The
smallest lot permitted in OCR is 1 acre. However, all setbacks are the same. Uh there's a required front of 50, side of 25, and a rear of 25. The parcel itself is 50 ft wide. So when the setbacks are
applied, there is no buildable area. There are also wetlands on site, and the site is in our natural resource management area, which requires a 50ft uh upland buffer. When that is applied, there is also no buildable area. So, the applicant is proposing um to construct a
1,200 foot home that is outside of the wetlands. You can see the wetland lines on the plan. They are the blue dotted lines. Um variance two is to reduce the front yard from 50 ft to 25 ft. Variance three
is to reduce the east side from 25 to 10. Uh variance four is to reduce the west side from 25 to 9.9 and variance five is to reduce the rear from 50 to 36.8. Overall staff recommends approval on
variances 1 through five with three staff recommended conditions and I'm available for comment or question. >> Thank you Mr. Shams. Any questions for staff hearing? None. Is the applicant present? You want to still come forward, sir?
>> Could I get your name and address for the record? >> Uh, my name is Kenneth Ashley. My address is 415 South Woodward Avenue, Dand, Florida. >> Okay. You've heard the staff report. Anything you'd like to add to it? >> Uh, yeah. I just um I just like to iterate that uh that the whole um
Savannah area that uh that we're working on in that property area is all OC 1, four or five. And if you look at the I was trying to see if you guys can look at page 17. I don't
know if you can bring that up. If you can see our our lot is in red, but if you look at the whole Savannah area from our lot going all the way to Holly Road, all the lots are are like the same consistent. I don't know what happened,
how it turned into there and how the zonings got like the way they did, but I was hoping uh the owners are they're not asking you to change the zones in the area. We're just asking to have our variances uh allowed so we can build a
foundation home on the property. >> All right, sir. Any questions for the applicant? Miss Craig, >> the the lots that are shown on this map, are they developed in any way or are they still >> No, they're all all individual lots that are just like the uh the owners that I'm
working with now. And I I looked it up my own diligence. They're all they're all owned by separate people now. Uh there each each individ 90% of all Savannah area lots are owned by individuals, not not uh um one owner
where they could put it together and redo some kind of agricultural design. So it's either going to be like uh separated lots which could actually help the community. It could it can bring more revenue for the uh Ostein area. It
could uh bring more in businesses because there'll be more people that would move to the area to maybe develop those lots up and and we're not trying to like degrade the neighbors across the street that have the bigger lots, but I I looked at some of the houses across
the street. I mean, they're not million-dollar homes across the street, you know? They're just they're older homes that, you know, are are um that they're living in. And so we're not trying to like downgrade the area from having these smaller lots, you know, in
the in the neighborhood. >> So none of these lots are developed yet. Yours would be the first one. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions for the applicant? Do we have any public participation for
him for this case? >> No, sir. >> Okay. We're going to close the floor for public participation. You can have a seat. And um we'll give you a decision here in a few minutes. >> I believe that there may be one person who >> I I own two of the last James.
>> Do you would you like to speak to this case? >> Yeah. I'm sorry. I didn't know. >> Well, you can come on up and then once you speak, just fill out one of those forms and give it to Miss Tucker to my immediate left here. >> Uh give your name and address. >> My name is uh Robert Ericson. I live at
six 664 Elgroveve in Deltona. >> Okay. >> Uh I own two of the lots, the one behind him, >> which I'm willing to sell him, which would give him another 50 ft off the street. I also have the the lot to the
side of him, which would give him another uh 50 ft to the side. So, I could triple the size of his lot if that helps you with your decision. and and that's fine. And the other thing is, yes, there was a house back in there. There was a house there uh some time
ago. The house is completely rotted away. If you go back in there, you can see where the bathtub was and the toilet was. And there's a there's a telephone pole uh where the electricity used to run to, but that, you know, the lines of have have from time have fallen away. So, the
truth is, yes, it has. It was there was one home back in there in the day. Okay, >> that's all. I just wanted to add that. >> All right. Thank you, sir. >> Yes, sir. You can come give a rebuttal on that. Here we go. >> Yeah, I always let the applicant come
back and give a rebuttal. >> I just want to I just want to state I appreciate any help that we get, but we we have nothing to do with what's going on there. We don't want to buy any other lots. He the owner's happy with the lot that he has for himself. He's not trying to entrepreneur any of these other lots
that are out there in the Savannah area. He's just we're just trying to focus just on our lot. So, >> well, we're not here to force anyone to buy a position. >> I just want to make it clear. I appreciate people's help, but I I told everyone just look, we're trying to just get one thing at a time here, you know,
and uh that's it. >> All right, sir. >> I appreciate it. >> All right. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. We're going to close the floor for commission uh for public participation. Open up commission discussion or a motion. I'll be glad to make a motion. >> Go ahead, Miss Shel.
>> I move that we approve case number V-26-035 subject to three staff conditions on page seven of our report. >> Second. >> That's variance one through >> all five. >> Correct. Okay.
>> All right. I got a motion on the floor to approve variance V26035. varants one through five with the three staff recommended conditions from Miss Shelley and a second from Mr. Costa. Any discussion on the motion hearing? None. All those in favor
signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? >> Motion carries unanimously. All right. Michelle, could I get the next case, please? >> Yes, sir. Uh, case number V26038, variance to the accessory structure
requirements on rural residential RR zoned property. >> Thank you, Miss Shelley. And Miss Tucker, this one's yours. You're going to do dual roles today, aren't you? >> I am, so please be patient with me. Uh, good morning, members. For the record,
Kelly Tucker, planner one. Um, first I would like to note for the record that there was a correction to the wording in the staff report on page four to give clarification to criteria four and five. Um, today before you, the applicant is requesting three variances to the size
and location of a proposed 1,600 square ft detached accessory structure on rural residential zone property. The rural residential zoning classification has a front and rear yard setback of 40 ft and a sideyard setback of 15 ft. The subject
parcel is on the northwest side of Oakai Court Culdeac and is lot four of the Oakai subdivision which was deemed vested and eligible for building permits on March 20th, 1986. The applicants purchased the property in April of 2002 and the parcel's
configuration is unique because it had because it has three front yards and two sideyards. Uh the north parcel line fronts on Illinois Avenue and the west parcel line fronts on Indiana Avenue. Both roads are platted unpaved rightways. Additionally, on the west
side of the property, there is a 50-foot gas line easement which takes away from their buildable area, and the applicant also has a 1-ft non-vehicular access easement on both the north and west property lines. The proposed structure will be placing an existing carport that
has a smaller footprint. The structure did not receive a permit or variances for its location. However, the new structure will house the applicant's larger automotive vehicles that would not fit in the existing garage attached to the house. Variance one is to allow
an accessory structure to be located in the front yard on rural residential zoned property. Variance two is to reduce the north front yard setback from 40 ft to 21 ft. And variance three is to reduce the east sideyard setback from 15 ft to 11 ft. Staff recommends approval
for variance requests 1 through three as the uh variances meet at least three of the five criteria for granting said variances and there are two conditions for the PLLDRC's consideration. I'm available for any questions. >> Thank you, Miss Tucker. Miss Bush, you had a question.
>> Thank you, Chairman. Yes, I have a few. Um just out of curiosity, this is more maybe a question for all of you down here. How um this is what we consider a flag lot, correct? Generally speaking, >> no ma'am. >> No. Okay. We have def definitions of a
flag lot then. Um because you talk about the criteria of how the um parcel is unique and I was just curious if it was considered a flag lot, how unique those are within the community. We prohibited them where I was. So, >> it's unique in the fact that it doesn't
have a rear yard like a standard lot. So, most parcels have a front, sorry, a front, two sides, and a rear. Right. Uh but for this one because it abuts to two platted rideways from a previous plat and then the culde-sac that was a replplat in 20 or excuse me 1986. So
that's what gives it its unique configuration. >> Right. It's the it's the setbacks not necessarily I was looking at the actual unique configuration of the boundary of the property lines not necessarily the unique considerations of the fact that it was abudding those side streets. So that's why I asked about the flag lot.
But that's okay. Um, I do have a question for you on criteria two. Um, it states that um, uh, variance 1 through three, the applicant chose the size and location of the carport. It's 1,600 square ft. So, how are they meeting um,
how is this meeting a special condition that does not result from the actions of the applicant if they are the ones choosing the size of the building? I'm sorry. I just trying to pull up the staff report. One moment. >> Take your time. >> And to clarify, you said criteria two.
>> Yes, criteria two. I don't want to answer the question for but it would seem like it would be the intended use of the building is the for the size. >> Correct. Right. >> Yeah. I believe that the way that she was going with the answering that criteria was that a variance would be required regardless for the structure in
its proposed location. So the size and the setbacks within that area for the most part they would need a variance to construct it. So that's where she went with the criteria for stating that it is met. But if it was reduced to
maybe it doesn't have to park an RV, doesn't have to park a boat, right? That's the decisions of the applicant. So if it can be reduced then it because that's the intent of the applicant to use it for that use. But that's not what we're approving. We're approving the structure size, right? the dimension
criteria. So if taking the use out of it completely, this is the applicant making the request to build the structure this size for what his intended use is, but it's it still doesn't meet that criteria because it's it is a result a direct
result of the actions of the applicant that he's making that request here today. >> Yes. If the commission believes that that criteria is different for how they analyze it, then you have the ability to recommend denial of the case. >> Thank you. I just wanted to ask those
questions um and make clear um that I do not think that that was answered accurately. Criteria four, I know that you had modified that. So, I appreciate that because I did have some questions there um because it literally says the variance request was the minimum request
possible or was not. So, I appreciate that you removed that. Um, and it still I still don't think it meets that criteria regardless because again they can make it smaller. That's my same justification for criteria too. Um, so I
just want to make sure that those were um, we understand accurately represented. >> Okay. Any other questions for staff hearing? None. Is the applicant present?
>> Yes. >> Could I get you to come forward, sir? >> Could I get your name and address? >> Uh, James Keell, 1415 Oakai Court. >> Okay. You've heard the staff report. Anything you'd like to add to that? No,
I I'd like to add the uh you know, if you it's not necessarily about the size of the structure, but the location of the structure because you to drive in that portion of the yard there, you got to go to right adjacent to the uh of the home and get past the HVAC equipment.
So, the practicality of, you know, arguing the size, you know, I don't see really applicical because it's it's the distance the offset from the house to the right. And so that's it's it's about vehicle access. >> Okay.
All right. Any other any questions for the applicant? Okay. Do we have any public participation forms for this case? >> No, sir. >> All right, sir. We're going to close the floor and give you an answer here in a few moments. We're going to close the floor for public participation. Open up
for commission discussion or a motion. >> I'll be glad to make a motion. >> Go ahead, Miss Shelley. Move that we approve case number V-26-038 subject to the two staff conditions. Second. >> I got a motion on the floor to approve V26038
with the two staff conditions for variance one through three from Miss Shelley and a second from Mr. Costa. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Any opposed? I
>> motion carries >> five to one with Miss Bush and descent. >> Okay, Miss Shel, can I get the next case, please? >> Yes, sir. Case number V-26-041, a variance to the minimum yard
requirements on urban single family residential R9 zoned property. >> Thank you, Miss Shelly. And Miss Ray, is she is she here today? Are you taking this? Mr. Champs? >> Yes, I'm taking Christmas cases.
>> Mr. Champs, >> Kelly with the slides. >> All right. So, the applicants proposing one variance to reduce the southwest front yard from 25 ft to 8 ft for a proposed exterior staircase.
The site is developed with a uh 238 ft home built in 1988. They're making a 726 ft addition to the northern area of the home and that is location where there is currently a stairway. They're removing the existing northern stairway because
of the addition and shifting it to the southwest area to connect to a balcony. Uh, per section 72 277 in the code, unenclosed stairways and balconies can encroach three and a half feet into a minimum yard. The balcony meets this at
21.9 ft and the proposed staircase is designed to connect to it. Um, but it does not meet this and must meet principal setbacks. Since stairway is proposed to be eight to be built at the 8 foot line, it encroaches an additional 13.5
feet beyond the permitted allowance. Um staff found that the staircase could be redesigned to encroach less into the setback. So overall, staff recommends denial as it fails to meet criteria 1 through four. If approved, staff
recommends two conditions. I'm available for comment or question. >> Thank you, Mr. Jims, any questions for staff? Is the applicant present? Would you come forward, please? If I could get your name and address for the record, please.
>> Lisa Dangle. Uh 6537 Ingram Road, New Simra Beach, Florida. >> Okay. And you, sir? >> I'm George Driscoll. Um I'm the builder and I'm also a neighbor at 6402 River Road. >> All right. Thank you. You've heard the
staff report. Anything you'd like to add to that? >> Yes. So, we purchased this house from the owners that previously had it. They bought it as a short-term rental not knowing that Bthoon didn't allow it. So, they put it back up for sale. We purchased it for us for the to be our
full-time residence. Um after we purchased it, my husband was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. So, we ended up really wanting to have some type of internal stairs to make it um where you could go from the bottom to
the top staying inside uh because currently in it when we purchased it, it was two separate homes. You could not get from the downstairs to the upstairs. So, we did work with an architect and the only way we could come up with internal stairs was to take the entire
downstairs front room and it would come up in the middle of our living room and that you see any which way you'd have to go, you'd have to walk around the staircase. So, after working with him, we did external stairs and then decided that we could put another garage in front of
those stairs, but that would be where the existing staircase is now. So by moving this the and if you look to see where the original staircase that we just were shifting it from where it was onto the north side of the house into where it would be centered into where
the new front doors would be. >> Okay. Do we have any questions for the applicant? >> Can I jump in there for >> Go ahead. >> I want to point out Excuse me. Uh I want to just address criteria one and two. I guess that's two of the criteria that
weren't met. Um if you look at the the page seven which shows what we propose and the survey. Um you'll notice that the existing stairway um and the new stairways for the most part are 1 ft
difference. So we're we're asking to come out one foot from the existing original stairway and just basically flip to the other side of the driveway. Um that being said, we, you know, um choosing where we did the addition was
obviously done because the garage was on the north side already. Um putting the additional garage on the opposite side didn't make sense from a building standpoint. You can't see in the topography, but the south side of the yard slopes up 7 ft. So, one, you really
couldn't do that type of addition on that side. And secondly, the spacing's different. and you wouldn't have enough versus that setback on that side. So, we were kind of that's was the place for the garage. So, that created the situation where we had to eliminate the
other stairway, you know, and they did put a stairway in the back of the new addition. It's it's accessible. It's not easily accessible, you know. So, the idea was to get something back toward the front again that was easily accessible from the driveway, you know,
to get in and out of and at the same time be aesthetically, you know, pleasing for the for the neighborhood. And there's several, again, I'm a neighbor. This is a very common stairway they use there. And there's you guys, I'm sure, are familiar with that area. The lots are very small
and very compromised down there. So, we all try to do our best to make things work. So, I think this is a good solution for them. So, I hope you guys will consider it. >> All right. Okay. Let's see if we have any public participation forms for this case.
>> No, sir. >> All right. We'll close the floor and hopefully have a discussion here and give you an answer. >> Thanks for your time. >> Thank you. We're going to close the fourth for public participation and open up for commission discussion or motion. >> I think I'm ready to make a motion.
>> Go ahead, Mr. case. B26 039. >> No, that's 41. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yeah, I just had the other one. Continued. >> Oh, yeah. Continue. Yeah. Um B26041. Uh pro. How many staff recommendations we have on that?
>> Two. >> Uh make a motion for approval with the staff recommendations. >> Second. >> Okay. I've got a motion on the floor from Mr. Sixma to approve V26041 with the two staff conditions and a second for Miss Shel. And Miss Craig,
you had a comment. >> Yeah, I have a question about the surface underneath the um the stairway. Is it a a slab concrete? Is it >> Okay, you can go ahead and come on up and answer that.
under under the existing porch will be what's there now. Um pavers andor block. Anything under the stairway that sticks out will be a a permeable rock or or landscape or vegetation. No no concrete or anything like that.
>> Okay. Any other comments? All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Okay, Miss Shelley, could I get the next case, please?
>> Yes, sir. Case number V-26-044. Variance variances to the accessory structure requirements on urban single family residential R4 zoned property. >> Thank you, Miss Shel. Miss Tucker, this
one is yours. U Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask that we u move this to the end of the meeting. The applicant is running late. >> Okay. We'll do that. >> I make a motion or do we >> No, I don't think we need a motion. That not moving. Move it. >> Okay. All right. What about the next
one, Miss Shelley? >> Yes, sir. Case number CPA 20-24-00007 small-cale comprehensive plan amendment from the urban low inensity uli future land use FLU designation to the mixeduse
zone MXZ FLU designation. >> Thank you Miss Shel Mr. Shams. >> Yes, we want to go ahead and PUD with it also. >> Oh, yes sir.
Uh case number PUD-24-012, a reszoning from the urban single family residential R4 zoning classification to a planned unit development with a mixeduse subclassification PUD. >> Okay, Mr. Shams. >> All right, good morning again. So, the
applicants proposing uh land use exchange and PUB for a 6.1 acre site in the Enterprise local plan area. They're looking to develop 80 multif family units and 22,500 square ft of non-residential. The site will be developed as a mixeduse
development. So, I'm going to go through the CPA first. Um, it's currently designated as ULI and the proposal is to extend the MXZ to this site from the existing MXZ area on the south side of Deerry Avenue as you
can see on your screen. So the enterprise local plan was originally conceptualized by county staff and residents to preserve cultural and historical significance from the city of Deltona expansion. It maintains lower intensity development patterns
than the neighboring city limits. Um the site is surrounded by churches, single family residences, the undeveloped land, public utilities. Um the residential properties range from about 3/4 of an acre to 10 acres. And
the homes in Deltona are on 7,400 square foot to 16,000 square foot lots. And to the northwest of the site is Deltona Middle School. So on the south side of Deberry Avenue along the main street is uh the
Enterprise Historic Main Street area. Uh it was once a commercial center uh with early 1900s plat such as the Assessor subdivision of Enterprise and the Lester Clark subdivision. Um over time the commercial lots redeveloped residential
and created a mixeduse pattern. Uh in the 1998 comprehensive plan uh amendment from the county uh this area was identified as having significant public interest. So in the 1990 uh comprehensive plan for
the 1990 comprehensive plan there were administrative resonings to align to the new future land use destinations. Enterprise property owners requested to maintain pre-existing commercial zoning as they perceive the loss of commercial development rights despite limited
commercial uses retained through the urban residential designations. Uh the MXZ designation was created um and the county designated the historic main street as MXZ to address the public concerns and allow existing residential
and commercial mixtures to remain. It currently corresponds directly to the historic Main Street area. In 2009, the Deerry Avenue extension rerouted most commercial traffic away from Main Street, causing a decline in
the mixeduse corridor uh function. So, the applicant is proposing to extend the mixeduse corridor north to the uh to the subject site on the north side avenue, which serves as a major thoroughare for enterprise and functions similarly to
the historic main street's prior role. Now to assess the change to MXZ uh we analyze the existing MXZ area and whether the proposed change would be consistent with the requirements of MXZ. MXZ is very unique as it's a land use
that has a specific mix between residential and non-residential. Um residential can be up to 90% of the whole site but within it there must be a breakdown between multif family and single family. So up to 90% can be
single family at 5 units an acre and between 10 and 50% can be multif family at 16 units an acre. Non-residentidential must be between 10 and 90%. So in the current enterprise MXC area there are 37 parcels
uh about um 35.1% are residential and 64.9 are non-residential which is consistent. However, there is no multif family in MXC. So that is where the intent is not
met. So if you incorporate the proposed project, uh it shifts the mix by adding multif family. So the residential becomes 43.6% and non-res 56.4%. And within that residential mix, there
is now an adequate mixture of both single family and multif family. And this meets the MXZ requirement. So the project is consistent with the enterprise local plan and the comprehensive plan because the change will provide land use balance within MXZ and help re revitalize the main street
district. Uh we also reached out to the enterprise preservation society to review the project and they provided a letter of support which has been included in the packet for the PUB. Um the change would uh result in an
increase of 2520 daily trips and 244 PM peak hour trips. Uh Valuchia County Traffic Engineering approved their TIA on May 16, 2025. utilities will be provided by Deltona
and the PUD will be developed um as 22,500 ft of commercial 56 apartments above the commercial use. So it' be a three store built three floor building and at the rear of the property there's
24 multif family attached town homes within six buildings of four units. Um phase one will comp be comprised of the apartments and commercial structures along Deerry Avenue, the storm water retention, landscape
buffers and necessary parking. And phase two is comprised of the town homes, the remaining parking and buffers. The site will be required to provide about 1 acre of common open space and they're proposing trails, walking paths and green space areas. Overall, staff recommends forwarding to both the county
council with recommendations of approval. I'm available for comment or question. >> Thank you, Mr. Shams. Any questions for staff? Miss Bush. >> All right. >> Um, it's not so much a question, it's a comment. So, if you would like, I can
wait till after. Um, or I can say it now. >> We can refer back if it's a comment if you don't mind. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> All right. Any other questions for staff? as the applicant present.
>> Good morning. >> Uh for the record, Mark Watts with the law firm of Cobb Cole, 231 North Woodland Boulevard, Dand. Um appreciate the opportunity to be here with you this morning. Um I like this project. I we've we've had a good time with it. Um it's
not been easy as we've worked through it, but um just from a a little bit of a perspective, um we've been working on this for probably four or five years um in a number of different iterations with different levels of detail and and uh information um and varying conversations
with folks in the in the community. So I want to thank staff for all the work that they've put into um kind of arriving where we are. Um, I want to thank the folks at the Enterprise Preservation Society as well because we we spent a lot of time down at the museum um kind of going through various
uh iterations of plans that they very much did not like. Um, and then ultimately one that hopefully by the end of the presentation here, you'll see um that they've uh they really do think it accomplishes the vision of what the um the local plan was originally intended to do. Um also have Bert Pascal with me.
He's the project engineer and one of the partners in the in the uh development of the the proposed Enterprise Village Square PUD. So, let me walk you through it. Um, one of the things ju just to give you kind of that overall orientation that I think Steve already, you know, kind of provided to you, but you can see the
star here on the on the aerial shows you where the general location of the property is. It's about six a little bit over six acres, and you can see Main Street, uh, going down there with the the yellow highlight. Um, and then Dev Avenue as it kind of comes across the top of the, you know, kind of local plan area. And I think it's important I'm
going to walk through a little bit of the history because historically before 2011 when we had the growth management act, one of the things that the county was required to do and any jurisdiction was required to do was not only adopt your plan, but look at it on a regular basis and evaluate whether
based on changing conditions that plan needed to be updated in different ways. We got away from that when the community planning act was adopted in 2011. It's now not necessarily a requirement. It's not something that the state, you know, makes sure that that you're doing as a community on a regular basis. You still
can. There's still those cycles that are there, but that it doesn't have the teeth that it used to where if you didn't do your E report every 8 years, you no longer were able to amend your comprehensive plan until you brought it into compliance. So, this is how the property sits today. Um, and there's the
current um, you know, future land use. You can see the MX classification in purple going to the south. You see the zoning map on the on the right. And there's a couple things to point out in here. Again, we talked about the local plan um having this mixeduse classification and this being kind of the historic commercial corridor for for
enterprise. Um and now you've got largely residential pattern along there and a lot of that along a high-speed roadway. Um, and so what you see as you drive through there now, if you've been down in that area of the county, is a lot of residential that's deteriorating along Deerry Avenue that, you know, um,
isn't necessarily being invested in. And you see the same thing along um, the main street corridor. So let's go back to to look at what this looked like as we were developing the original local plan. And I think one of the key things and let me see if I remember how to. So
the road network, let's see if I can do this. The old road network came through here right there. So you had, you know, the corner of Maine and Maine, if you will, that went through the center of historic enterprise. Um, that's the condition
that existed when the current plan was adopted. There we go. All right. So, a couple years after the plan was adopted, Deberry Avenue opened up. And the interesting thing that happened when that was u let's see your old commercial
corridor kind of main street here. The traffic bypassed it and now comes along there. And there are thousands of of cars a day that use Deberry Avenue to get from I4 to uh Ostein to the points between, you know, Deltona and and
Ostein. So you've got a high level of traffic going by there, but it all bypasses that area that we established in 2008 as the mixeduse area for the enterprise local plan. So as we started talking with staff, again, here's what you see with the
present day. As we started talking with staff, you know, we we and and the folks in the area, we looked at, you know, kind of the elements of the existing the existing plan. And one of the interesting parts, you know, there are some historic assets in there. You've got the museum, you've got the Florida
United Methodist Children's Home down on the south end of the Main Street corridor, but by and large, a lot of the the older historic structures and historic areas have have been removed over the years. You've got a lot of vacant area along Main Street. And so given that when the plan was put
together, you see the design standards along Main Street that we included here, you know, the the goal was to have, you know, non-residential developments be accompanied uh accomplished by implementing traditional building design, site planning standards to maintain proper scale and appearance and, you know, kind of achieve that
village hamlet uh character for Main Street. Um here's what Main Street looks like right now. So very little has happened um since the implementation of the plan. That's something that it's not just our opinion on it. It's something that we heard in talking with the folks at EPS about how the plan actually has
affected um the overall area. So you can see lot of open space, a lot of vacant land up and down that entire mixeduse corridor that we envisioned back in 2008. So the proposal is, you know, where the traffic has gone with Deberry Avenue to
extend that MX classification to the north to give Main Street a presence where the traffic is coming by now. Hopefully that then induces that additional interest down Main Street to reestablish that historic core in a way that's consistent with the design standards and everything else that have
been adopted for enterprise. So, moving into the the specific um plan, this is the the the site plan for um the Village Square um project. Um a couple of the things that we worked, you know, again, looking at the the
development standards and and the guidelines for the for the overlay, we brought the buildings close to the to the street. Even though you've got a high-speed road there, um you also have the Spring to Spring Trail on the south side of the street there right at this intersection. So, we created an opportunity for there to be outdoor cafe
seating along the roadway, parking behind those principal buildings, you know, a couple of residential, you know, uh, stories above the the commercial there. And then these are kind of actually part of my favorite part of this plan, these, um, town home multif family units that are along the back
side of the project. And I'll show you those in a little bit more detail here in a second. Um, actually right now. So, um, we went through and looked at the overall design characteristics. We reviewed the building designs and everything with the folks at EPS to make sure it was catching the right flavor of
that, you know, kind of Florida vernacular or some craftsman. It's kind of a a mix of of architectural themes, I think, is what our architect ultimately ended up saying, but um it it checked the boxes as we went through and and discussed it with the folks in the area um of what they had envisioned for, you
know, kind of this village hamlet, you know, area. So you can see here um the the building, you know, top top left picture is kind of that portion that fronts out to um Dev Avenue on the to the right of that. You can see kind of that outside, you know, activity area
that we've uh attempted to create behind the buffers along um that roadway. You can see that again in the bottom left. So these are all pictures that, you know, kind of show what the presence of the project looks like from Devi Avenue. And then I love these. So, these are
buildings that have four units in them, two-story units. Um, they're configured in almost like a pin wheel configuration if you look at the site plan. So, they kind of nest into each other and each has this, you know, kind of just going to highlight it cuz I like it. Um, these
open courtyard areas that are associated with the front entrance into um each of the units. So, you've got this kind of public private space that you come into the unit through to get into where your town home unit is. So I think that you know you know Bert and his team have done a very nice job I think of of you
know um designing this. So get that to clear. There we go. As a result and and we probably had 12 to 18 months of um time where we you know had meetings and went back and erased you know the the Aldi
footprint or something else that was there in in some of the original you know kind of plan iterations. Um this is uh the letter we received from from the Enterprise Preservation Society. Um they support it. Um they support that this is consistent with the implementation of
the vision, you know, that was originally kind of established through the local plan, but is updated to reflect what's happened with the infrastructure in the area and the traffic patterns that run run through that area. So um staff has given you, I think, a very thorough report. You've got the materials including our traffic
analysis and all the technical analysis that supports the recommendations of approval both for the comp plan and for the the resoning. I'll pause here and see if you've got any questions for me. >> Okay. Any question, Miss Bush? >> I do have a question. Um and it's on the PUD. So, is that
>> Sure. >> I can ask those qu Okay, >> sure. >> Um first off, I just thank you for a wonderful uh traffic impact analysis. Um I appreciate using the sixth edition. I got on a project last time that used the fifth edition and I did not appreciate that. So, thank you for
>> Chris Walsh always does a great job. >> Yes. Yes, he does. Um, but it's still overparked based on your calculations. So, why do you want to overpark it? >> We don't know the flex, you know, what the ultimate commercial uses will be. So, there could be um higher demands. You know, when you're deal dealing with
a mixeduse project like this, >> um you you're you're banking on kind of that dual use of of the parking spaces between the residential and the commercial. here. We're just we're hedging a little bit and since we've got it internally, it made sense. Now, one of the things that I think um you know,
even though we probably have more parking than we would otherwise need, um we're below the the county's requirements. So, where it's part of what we're asking for to wave during the with the PD, >> but we've also laid this out so that if you look at the overall site plan, those are the actual existing trees on the
site, too. So, we've tried to kind of work this whole project in and around the a lot of the existing stands of oaks that are on the property, but from a parking standpoint. It's behind the buildings. We're lowering it some. We probably could lower it more, but but we're trying to hedge a little bit. >> No, I understand. I just from an, you
know, this is these residents, these are their amenities, right? they're going to have to get in a car or walk or bike down Deberry Avenue, which is not the, you know, other than having that trail on the the south side of the facility. >> It's not really, you know, community oriented, right? It kind of sticks out
from where it is within Enterprise and within other residential, you know, quieter. So from that standpoint, that's why I'm asking if maybe you could shift some of the parking to amenities to support the residents that live there, support the the homeier uses that you're
trying to encourage within that mixeduse development. >> If I may, um just to clarify that point, um based on our parking requirements, uh we and the structures they have, they would need 219 spaces and they're proposing 199.
>> I'm aware. So they are requesting less than what we would require. So I just want to make sure that's >> I'm very well aware. >> I think your point is that the parking study that we provided shows we could go lower. >> Correct. Right. >> By like almost 30 spaces and that's pretty significant. I mean that's a lot of asphalt that you're putting down.
That's a lot of storm water that now you have to perk off into a pond that now people are going to do laps around. Right. So I'm just trying to throw that out there if you know this is >> we tried to strike a happy medium. Now, one of the things that we did from an amenity standpoint, um if you look at how the sites lay down, we do have, you
know, kind of this area off to um kind of the northwest corner that we're envisioning having a trail that goes around that area as well. That's also where an existing stand of oaks is. So, we think that'll become kind of a nice dog walk area for the residents. Um we've got this tree park that's in the
middle of the two mixeduse buildings. That's an existing oak that we're preserving there. So, that's going to be a little bit of a pocket park there. And also um just from the standpoint of resident amenities, the commercial, you know, the commercial and the cafes and those types of things also become some of the resident amenities.
>> Yeah, absolutely. >> So >> um but that was >> but your point Yeah, your point's well taken. >> Yeah. I I have to you know you know who I you know what I do for a living. So I I have to >> Well, and it's interesting because other jurisdictions I fight and fight and fight about >> right >> reducing parking. Exactly. >> In downtowns just like this one.
>> Exactly. Yeah. It's like this is what we want. We have comp plan policies that say to reduce urban sprawl, but yet the PE, you know, the um development regulations say that you have to overpark something that based on updated IT generations, you don't have to. And
>> parking doesn't generate any economic benefit for anybody. It's just hot. We have to do storm water. It's just And anyway, I'm very anti- parking spaces. So, um, anytime that you have the opportunity to remove them and build amenities that the community really wants,
>> put water back in the ground, >> keep the the, um, urban heat island effect off of it, we need to do that and we need to incentivize that. So, I appreciate what you did. Um, my question on the pud though, I do have a couple questions on the uses that you've listed and I was curious, are those uses pulled
from the commercial uses and popped in? Okay. Can we strike through a few that I don't feel comfortable with? Like nightclubs? I don't think the residents would want their building popping at 2 a.m. >> Yeah, I think that's okay. I think that
um the other one was liquor stores. I could take it or leave it because I do enjoy a good cocktail from time to time. And I'm sure the residents would like to be able to walk to a liquor store. It's probably safer for them to do so as well. Um >> that was one that actually had some support among the folks we met with in the area.
>> I'll leave it. I was just I not sure the nightclub was something that >> I think I think nightclub's one that we can pull out. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Those are uh all the questions that I have on the the pud. I thought it was really well written. Uh thank you for working with the community the way that you did. Um just keep working to reduce
parking. >> Yeah. >> Miss Craig, you had a question. >> Yes. I have two two questions that I one had to do basically with the same thing. the um the amount of common area or you know I forget what the description is
and I look at this map here and I think okay where am I going to be able to put a lawn chair out and uh enjoy the evening sunset. >> Sure. So >> and I don't and I'm not seeing it and I'm you know the um the PUDS residential
area requirements want 1.01 01 acres of common open space and I and it should not include retention pond and it should not include um landscape buffers. Where is there an acre there um that
could act, you know, could um accurately be enjoyed by people in the area. So again, I think here what we've focused on um with regard to the units in the back, you've got um the trail
area, the the area that will go around the retention pond in that in that stand of of trees that's being preserved and everything kind of up in that northwest corner. Um you do have kind of more area behind the the landscape buffer along the front of the commercial buildings that also kind of serves as some of that
common open space area. the tree park in the middle between the two buildings. Um, and then again on those back units, you have that individual courtyard area that's provided for each of those units that's outdoor space. So, if you're a resident or an owner in one of those um those units, you'll have your own
outdoor space as well in the front of your unit. >> Well, if we could go back to the picture of the the um the next set. Okay. here on the on the lower left and and on the right hand side
>> lots of asphalt and I'm thinking August um >> and I'm bringing groceries into the house and I have to make several trips >> and so on and so forth and I just I I just have a problem with that much
asphalt. >> Right. and and again it's a reduction from what the county would otherwise require under the code. Um but you know it's it's um we're trying to strike that balance. Um here I think if you look at how we've got this oriented there is
parking up along each of where those units are. So you'll have that convenient location but you will have to walk in from you know the parking area. >> Okay. And then my other question, and this is something that's probably because I'm I'm not familiar with how
how the number is determined, but it says we've got 80 residential units that you're that you're introducing here, and yet there's only 11 additional students being added to schools. >> And that's based on the school's student generation formulas. We don't we don't
calculate those numbers. We provide, you know, here's the types of units that we're developing. we provide that information to the school district and they provide us with the student generation uh report. So that's based on their formula >> realistic >> it seems to be um and also with regard
to the the general trend that we've got with the county school system right now is that um overall enrollment is you know declining frankly um so um from a capacity standpoint now we will have to check that capacity again um this is kind of the preliminary look at capacity
um to verify while we're changing the zoning and the land use whether or not we need to be looking at mitigation strategies or anything of that nature. But um be when we're in the site plan process or in the final or the planning process, we have to go back to the school district again to check their
capacity again and at that point in time get a a a vested determination of of capacity from them. And again, if they're if they don't have capacity at that point in time based on how they calculate their student generation rates, then we would have to work with
them to to work on on mitigating it. But right now, the school district is working on plans in this part of the county. You know, they've recently acquired land over in Deerry. The idea is to develop a K through8 um school over there that will um largely take a
lot of the students from Ostein um I'm sorry, the Enterprise Elementary that's just south of this site and shift a lot of that population over to the the Dev location. So, that is, you know, some of the the capital planning that this the school district's doing right now in this part of the county. >> Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Sigma. >> Yeah, Mark, I would say I'm very impressed that you you got the preservation society on your side. It's a lot of meetings that takes. So, it it shows what a good job you guys did with this project and Enterprise is a very
unique area. I know Emily lives out there, but beautiful area. I really think you guys did a great job designing this and it fits right in >> Thank you. >> the area nicely. So, good job. >> Tip my hat to to Bert and his team. Yeah, good job, >> Miss Bush. >> Uh, thank you, chairman. Um, couple more
questions. Um, kind of on the the family side. Are these going to be market rent um or affordable or a mix? >> There's there's no determination yet. There's the intent would be market rate. Um, but I mean, any of anything is possible there, but the intent at this point would be market rate. >> And who do you anticipate to be the um
buyers? I'm assuming renters of the apartments or buyers of the town homes? Is are you skewing more to the older crowd? Are you looking at families? Because >> I think it would be a mix. I I don't think we know that yet. Right now, we're just at that planning stage. Um, this strikes me as similar to something like
the Yardley that just was built here in Dand. >> Um, and you know, I worked on that project. I've talked with the builder of that project since then and they actually have an very interesting mix of young professionals moving into the area. I actually had one of my associates that just joined our firm about a year ago that was living in
there up until last week. um who moved to the you know relocated the area and she was there until you know she found a house to buy. Um but there's also a mix of of empty nesters that you know want to have the lack of you know requirement to maintain their home you know a big
yard or anything like that and the freedom to be able to lock the door and go travel and things of that nature. So I think we'll have a a mix of those things okay of those those populations >> as it um as you continue to finalize these things. I think to my other members, if you are going to be
marketing or think that you're going to have families in, then I would consider some sort of playground amenity. What can you do on the south side of that walking trail because kids aren't going to walk around a retention pond? >> And we probably have some areas that we can look at that. You know, again, we've got some green space over on the west side that we may be able to look at.
>> You know, I I have a couple ideas in mind for like some traffic um towns for kids, you know, to teach them early biking and walking skills. So we can chat. I >> We've got an intersection right here that connects to the trail, so there's some opportunities. >> Yes, absolutely. >> So, >> thank you.
>> Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? >> Do we have any public participation forms for this case? >> No, sir. >> All right, Mark. We're going to close participation and open up commission discussion or a motion. >> I'll be glad to make a motion. I'll be
glad to make a motion then. >> Okay. Wait, just a moment. We just miss Let me Miss Bush, you had a comment. >> Well, I had the comment that I wanted to make to staff. So, I You want to do the motion first and then I can make the comment. It won't My comment doesn't matter on the motion. >> Okay. All right. Go ahead, Miss Shelly. >> Okay.
>> Um, do you want me to read them both in? >> No, one at a time. >> Okay. uh case number CPA-24-00007 that the we find the future we recommend uh that we find the future land use amendment consistent with the comp plan and forward the application case to the
county council with a recommendation of approval to submit to the department of commerce for expedited state review and to the growth management commission for certification >> second that's a lot of reading there you >> thank you I'm a good reader You're very good.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Okay, I've got a motion on the floor to approve CPA 24007 and find the future land use amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and forward the application case number
CPA 24007 to the county council for recommendation of approval to submit to the department of commerce for expedited state review and to the Blush County Growth Management Commission for certification and a second from Mr. Sixman. Any discussion on the motion,
Miss Bush? >> Uh, yes. Thank you. Um, for the record, I I haven't been on record saying this. I've been on the public side saying this. Uh, Mr. Shams know this. I absolutely hate the mix
requirement. It is so challenging for you all to have to math, right? Do the math, make it work. And it is so not transparent to the public. If I owned a property in Enterprise and I wanted to develop it or put a single family home on it, I've got to go ask Stephen to do
a whole bunch of convoluted math to figure out if I can even do that and then what if somebody else has several other projects in the pipeline that messes up with that math and now 6 months earlier I was told that I could do one thing and six months later now I can't. So, I think that the county needs
to absolutely immediately remove that mixed requirement and call it something like um mixeduse commercial and having residential supportive without maybe having the mix requirement andor mixeduse residential, having the residential be dominant and the commercial be supportive. Um that's what
we did in our city and we were able to get a it was transparent to the developer that was coming in. We were able to fasttrack a lot of these projects because this is the development that we want. The comp plan has it written this way. I know the land development regulations have not caught up yet. That's very common in most
communities. But we cannot require this to take several years and I understand why. But if we want this type of growth and development, we have to incentivize it and we have to do it sooner than what we're doing now. So I say remove the mix. It is not transparent for the
public and we absolutely need to be transparent in times like these because our resources are very limited. So, I would love to make um a recommendation for staff to revisit what that mix looks like and move to remove that mix requirement or separate those
specifically. I don't think that that's going to come under Senate Bill 180 because we're not changing anything. You're just s you're just parsing it out essentially. But those are my comments. I hate the mix. It's really challenging for all of us to understand what it is that's going to go there and we have to do this dance every time and it's not
fair. >> But how do you how do you feel? I love >> quite quite good. Now, thank you. I was able to get off my chest, so I appreciate that. I've >> been complaining to everybody public or privately about >> you guys remember what the motion was.
>> All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. >> Okay. On the second case, the PUD 24012. >> Uh any commission discussion or a motion? >> Um I'd like to jump in real quick. If
you want to make a motion at the end of the meeting. >> Yeah. >> Then you can for your comment. >> Thank you. >> Can we just ditto it? >> Okay. >> Go ahead. I get yours. >> I'll make a motion to approve case number PUD-24-012
that we forward the resoning application case number PUD-24-012 to the county council for final action with a recommendation of approval. >> And I will second that one. Also, I had a motion on the floor to forward the resoning application case number PUD
24012 to the county council for final action. The recommendation of approval for Miss Shel and a second for Mr. Sixma. Any discussion on that motion? >> Uh, Mr. Chair, just to just to make sure, um, you are removing nightclubs. >> Oh. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yes. Including removing nightclubs. Thank you. Thank you very much, >> Mr. Cross. Now, I have a question >> on that, please. cuz I have a problem with that nightclub thing. So, give me the definition. What's the county's definition of nightclub while you're looking for that? So, here's a here's a question I have. So, I
I frequent a uh a sushi restaurant in Port Orange that they run a restaurant at a dime and then once a month on a Saturday they have a let's call it a rave for the best better part of a is that considered a nightclub? >> So, I have the definition.
>> You go ahead please. uh commercial premises where food, alcoholic beverages or other refreshments may be obtained for consumption on the premises and where four shows or other forms of entertainment may be may be provided for the customers. >> So if I have a uh if I have a Spanish
restaurant, I have a piano player, is that considered an eye club? >> No, I think uh that's a restaurant. >> Restaurant serves alcohol, >> but the primary purpose is for uh consumption of food. >> Correct. So, nightclub, the definition is primary purpose.
Um, if it's a restaurant that serves alcohol, has a piano player during dinner hours, and then after from 9 to midnight, it's just a piano player or derves and the open bar. Is that considered a nightclub? What I'm not I'm
not opposed to the nightclub per se when you're thinking of a you know, it's just drinks and bands and that's I don't have a problem with that. But when you start nitpicking, so if I have that restaurant, I've got that piano player that stays after the dinner hour and plays through till, you know, midnight.
>> Is that still considered a nightclub? What that would that be restricted if we stricken the word nightclub? >> Uh, Mr. Costa Scott Ashley, for the record? >> Yes, sir. >> No, we would not. Um, the nightclub, as Stephen just indicated, or Steve, sorry. Um, that would be the primary use.
There's the floor show and action. Uh restaurants and bars often have music, but it's always an ancillary to the primary function of the use. Okay. Which is to serve a new alcohol if it's a bar or if it's a restaurant, primarily the food. >> Just
>> Okay, perfect. Thank you. That answers question. >> But it would not the nightclub would factor in on a a um sports bar or winghouse or something of that nature, would it not? >> No, it would not. Those are still going to be considered restaurants with any
entertainment associated. It would be ancillary to the primary and it is the restaurant function or the bar function. If you're looking to wholly have the dance floor, the night show operation, that is your primary function of the use. That's where the nightclub's going
to come in. So, if we put that caveat in there of the nightclub, then a sports bar or wing location that also serves alcohol could locate there. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. I just don't want to hamstring
them on something of that nature. >> And we know your preference, too. >> Okay. Okay. >> All right. >> Complaint. >> All right. So, we amending the motion or not? >> Yes. I'll amend my motion to uh deny
her. How should I exclude nightclub? >> Exclude nightclub. >> And I I seconded that one. >> Okay. >> And and thanks for staff for that definition cuz that's that was good. >> Okay. I've got a motion with the exclusion of nightclubs for that PUD
24012 from with from Miss Shelley and a second from Mr. Sixma. Any discussion more on the motion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed. >> Motion carries unanimously.
>> Thank you for your time. >> You're welcome. Appreciate it. >> Thank you guys. >> Thank you. >> All right, Miss Shel, could I get the next case, please? And you might as well do both of them together also. Okay,
got it. Okay. Case number CPA-25- Z007 smallcale comprehensive plan amendment from the urban medium intensity future land use FLU designation to the commercial COOM FLU designation and
separately or read them both in >> read them both in all because they're comparing >> Yes, sir. Uh, case number PUD-25- Z006, a reszoning from the urban single family residential zoning classification to a planned unit development with a
business subclassification PUD. >> Thank you. And Mr. Shams, this one yours also. >> Hi, good morning. The applicant is proposing a land use change in PUD resoning for a 2.34 acre site for RV and boat storage. Uh, first the land use
change. Um the proposed change from UMI to commercial is to allow the use. Um is um it's more synonymous with neighborhood business areas which are less intense. The RV boat storage is considered a more intense commercial use
by our code. So the surrounding area along US 92 is developed with similar uses which include bus storage, contractor shop, and equipment yard with flex office. When assessing trip generation, the maximum use between UMI and commercial is a convenience store. So by that
definition, there is no change in trip generation. Um the utilities will be provided by the tona beach. And for the PUD, the site is within the High Ridge neighborhood local plan which requires a PUD for resonings. Um the site is not proposing any buildings,
just vehicle storage and parking. Uh the permitted uses include car, boat, mobile home, motorcycle, RV storage, and flex office. There's two access points. The primary being on US 92 and a secondary emergency access
uh being on Old Deand Road. There is no structures and it includes landscape buffering. Uh the current R2 zoning can be developed with eight homes based on the size of the site. This produces this could produce 80 daily trips and amm
peak hour. The applicant uh provided a trip generation memo for their proposed use and found that it would generate 10 daily trips in 1 PM peak hour which is an overall reduction. Uh the corridor itself has been transitioning towards more commercial.
So the proposed use is consistent with surrounding properties. Overall, staff recommends forwarding uh both applications to the county council with recommendation of approval and I'm available for comment or question. >> Any questions for staff? Miss Bush.
>> Thank you, Vice Chairman. Um what are all the urban sprawl requirements? They weren't listed out. It was just the ones that I believe staff felt that they met, but I would love if you could list all of them out because it only met four of the eight
criteria and I want to know what the other four are. >> Okay, if you give me one second, I'll pull them. >> Sure. Thank you. Okay, so the ones that we thought were met are no adverse impact on natural resources. promote sufficient and cost effective
provision of extension or extension of public infrastructure balance of land use based upon demands of residential population and use density intensities of use in urban form. So the ones that we did not
include are promotes a walkable and connected community and provides for compact development and mix of uses at densities and intensities that will support a range of housing choices. Promotes conservation of water and
energy, preserves agricultural areas and activities and preserves open space and natural lands and provides for public open space and recreational needs. So, we didn't think those applied >> naturally. I I would agree. Um, if if that's possible in the future, if you
could include all the criteria and say why you don't think it meets it and why you think it meets it the same way you do the variance criteria, that would be really helpful. >> Sure. >> So that I can either agree or disagree and and have that debate and discussion amongst our our members. >> Um, so I I want to follow up with what
you do think that this does fit um within that um those criteria. How does an RV storage facility not have an inverse an adverse impact on natural resources and ecosystems? Well, I believe that they are providing
the required 15% uh tree preservation area for the site and so for our code requirements for what they would have to meet for environmental impact um they would be meeting it. >> But the question is not that they meet minimum requirements of the code. It's that are they do they have adverse
impact on natural resources and ecosystems? Yeah, there's no wetlands on the property or any flood planes. So, impact natural resources if they're made requirements for the reservation. There are no other um items that we would typically look at from the comp plan for
this specific area that would say that it does have an adverse impact. So it goes back to depends on what you are considering an adverse impact and what you are considering th those environmental um items to be. Um I believe there were wetlands on this
property. It was minute but there were um and I agree there's probably a difference of opinion of what adverse impacts on the natural resources and ecosystems are. But I think that that is the pro that's the responsibility of
staff and the applicant to bring that to us to explain that that they do not have adverse impacts on the natural environment and the ecosystems and let us make that determination based on what we feel um is reasonable and makes that determination. Um, and I guess I
continue. Um, how does the RV storage facility promote the efficient and cost-effective provision or extension of public infrastructure and services, which I'm conf I'm confused by that language because isn't any extension of public infrastructure and services considered sprawl.
>> So, the idea with that criteria is there is no extension because utilities already exist. So, we're not introducing a a land use change where they go out further than they're already located. Okay, understood. Having that explanation in addition to you saying it
meets that requirement would help answer a lot of questions for me when I read these moving forward. >> Of course, we can add that in. >> Appreciate it. Um, and then lastly, how does the storage facility provide uses, densities, and intensities of use and urban form that would remediate an
existing or planned development pattern in the vicinity that constituents, I'm sorry, that continues sprawl? Because to me, this is again the same land use pattern that we see. We have some uses out there probably in an area
that really should have never been developed in the first place, right? That is what it is, right? But now we're just continuing to check the box and say, "Yeah, sure. Come, you know, develop this." One of the questions that I have on the PUD side of things is what's the ISR? How big is the
impervious surface on this? Because again now we're continuing to have these independent developments come in and build out to the max and we're asked to just say yes and check a box and I really want to make sure that we are following that criteria to a tea and
that your explanation of why it meets that urban spraw or doesn't meet that urban sprawl criteria is really well explained to the public and to us who have to make those decisions. >> So the idea with the last criteria is it already has an urban land use. So we're
simply taking one that is primarily residential with some commercial components and changing it for a strictly commercial land use. So it's still urban. So in that regard, it's not changing as much as if we were going from like a rural to a commercial. So
that's what our our thoughts on that. >> Okay. Um but yeah, having that understanding really beneficial moving forward. I don't necessarily agree, right? because the use is much more intense than if it were to be where it was existing somewhat residential
neighborhood commercial which is what it really was slated for and I think really the the use the the site really kind of is asking for not something to be developed like this and um I know that there's a need for these types of uses but um this this is the definition of
continuing urban sprawl so in my professional opinion right thank Miss Greg. >> Yeah. My question is sort of related along that same line. Is there a plan um for
this area being surfaced where these where these this storage is going to take place? Are they going to go in and completely cover it with um an imperous material as it's shown here on the map? the the
brown space I assume is is all uh will that all be paved over. So, I believe that they're proposing um crushed asphalt millings for the surface.
>> So, it'll be loose. >> Mhm. >> And the applicant is here. If you have those questions for them, they'll be able to answer. >> Yeah. Okay. Any more questions for staff >> hearing? None. Is the applicant present? >> Real quick, chairman, are we asking questions about the PUD as well during
this time or are we doing that separate? Yeah, you can ask questions about that also. >> Okay, I do have questions on the pud as well. Thank you. Um, uh, why are there permitted uses for the storage beyond RV and boat? It includes mobile homes.
>> Is there a reason for that? >> So, I I would defer to the applicant, but I believe the reason was uh they wanted to include it in case of future expansion. they can come back and amend the PUD, but at the time they didn't they didn't
want to provide any structures. They just wanted to have this. >> Okay. Um >> and depending upon what the applicant states, you know, it's no different than the night clothes we took out of the last PE. You can always look at that. Uh
so I let's let the applicant make his presentation and and we'll go from there on >> questions of that nature. Okay. >> Okay. Um, am I correct in reading that there were um what it seemed like live work units
on this facility? It seemed like you were mentioning in the staff report that there were other similar businesses around here, but that people lived at those locations as well. Is that correct? >> Oh, you're talking about manager occupied units? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. And that's not taking place here,
correct? >> No. And just to clarify the last point that that's just a storage of vehicles. It's not to live in. I I saw >> home. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I understood. Yeah. Okay. Um I have other comments and I will wait on those.
>> Okay. Is the applicant present? >> Good morning. Could I get your name and address for the record? >> Sure. Steve Buzzwell with Parker Mitchenber and Associates. I'm the engineer of record and um kind of representing the uh Storm LLC as the
owner. Okay. >> Um I guess the first question um Miss Craigy had uh we are required to have an improved surface. We can't just have shell or grass. Um so we're required to
kind of meet the LDC when we come in for final site plan. Um we are required to meet all of the St. John's River Water Management criteria for nutrient removal, uh, storm water treatment, um, flood plan attenuation and so forth. Um,
so we're treating the 100red-year storm event. Um, again, this is these are all items that will fall under the final site plan review, but this is the first um, step kind of towards that. So, um that is the intent, but the way we've um
and appreciate the exhibit up there, um the way it's laid out is um all of the landscape um there's a 35- ft landscape buffer that is up front and then we have additional screening um to try to off
you know be as far off of ISB screen standpoint uh just basically from a uh look standpoint. uh we have coordinated with FDOT on access and um have their blessing uh once we get the uh go-ahad
to kind of make the application. Um emergency access is provided to through old the land road and there um like it was mentioned before there is a water line that runs here out um basically to service the the jail area
the the um school board and so forth near Indian Lake Road. though um this area and one more um Miss Bush the the wetland comment there it's about you know it's within the area that is not being impacted which is at the very
very souththeast corner it's 002 acres so it's there are wetlands but um it's an area about um 10 by 10 I think laying right in kind of within where the existing landscape buffer
So, um, with that being said, the question about the mobile home, that's just basically storage of RVs. Um, not really for people to live there. So, that's where that kind of and it could be mobile home vehicle or recreational
vehicles if you want to change that. >> Okay. Miss Bush, you had a question for the applicant. >> Yeah, just more of a clarification on the mobile home side. Um, you know, I what I don't want to see is that being used as a storage for mobile homes are being purchased and then either the lot
it needs to sit somewhere while the lot is either being cleared from its prior where the private mobile home is. And I'm just I'm cautious about those types of things. I also understand that we have an influx of tiny homes, right? And that could be constituted as a as a mobile home as well depending on how you
define it or how it's registered. Um, so I just want to be very clear as to what you are able to park within the PUD and what you're not and whether or not an oversized double wide is should be appropriate to put here and to be held.
Um, or if a a tiny home or an RV I don't disagree with the RV and the boat storage and those types of things, but you know, I don't I don't think the intent is to park double wides here for staging or for anything else. and the definition of a mobile home makes me wonder if that would be allowed under
the PUB. So maybe I can go back and ask staff maybe what that definition of a mobile home is um and determine whether or not we think that it needs to be struck. >> Okay, you repeat the question, please. >> Um I just we were talking about the
definition of a mobile home. He referred to it as an RV, but I would think that you guys would define that differently. Um, so can you read the definition of a mobile home? >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> And do you know off the top of your head if it includes tiny homes or is that a
different definition that you >> It depends if the tiny home has a chassis and is issued the uh certificate by the um >> motor vehicles. >> Motor vehicles. >> Yeah. DMV. Yeah. >> So it's depends. >> Okay. So if it is issued the DMV license, then it would be considered an
RV. Correct. It's on a chassis because it can be moved. But if it's not, yes, >> it's considered a HUD. Okay. >> It is a vehicle. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Mobile home is a HUD structure. There's a distinction in our code for the difference between uh in our code, it's
a mobile recreational vehicle and shelter and we break it down to the various types of recreational vehicles from a fifth wheel to a camper, trailer, so forth. So, they're not the same. And if you're concerned about it and I
think another thing you should look at and I'll just jump in is the listed use since that it is presented and my understanding staff that it's strictly for storage then we need to also look at the language and the use and strike the term sales and rental. If it's strictly
intended to be a sales I mean excuse me a storage site. There are other um there's at least another probably within less than a mile site that we did several years ago. The PED is the same thing. We've got actually two PUDs were
back to back next to the old restaurant site that do vehicle storage. It's an open area. uh you're here to see the peed because of the act the high-ridge neighborhood plan dictates if you're going to make changes for the commercial
it has to be done as a peed part of that is to look at how we can look at minimizing impacts on adjacent properties and fitting them in collectively with the overall area this has been an urban area of commercial residential development across the street is your urban single family zone
if you will the north side is primarily a mixture of some industrial, commercial and actually non-conforming residential uses. So that was the element when the comp plan was done create this local plan area because of the mixture in the PED process was
trying to make sure we can fit it in without going straight zoning where you have a whole list of uses but the peed allows you to narrow focus the use to fit in with the neighborhood. >> Thank you so much for that history and that explanation. Um because of I think
the the distinct difference between recreational vehicle and a mobile home, I would move to strike mobile home and also the um sales and service from the PUB language if the rest of the commission would agree.
>> Miss Shelly have a comment on that. I know in Daytona Beach, >> Michelle, your mic's not on. Um, I know that in Daytona Beach, uh, been wrestling or addressed this quite some time ago because there's neighborhoods
were finding so many people parking their mobile home in their driveways. So, they were specifically looking for storage areas where they could take and store that and then not be a neighborhood nuisance and all those other things. So, it is something that
people are looking for and um again clarifying the definition I think is important. And also the same thing with boats. I know a lot of people that store their boats in there for the same reason, not to have them in their driveways. >> I think what Miss Bush is alluding to and I don't want to put words in her
mouth, but you're thinking of it like a trailer where someone livable trailer. >> That's what you're talking about. Mobile homes. >> Well, mobile homes I was more talking about. I've I've had when I managed the city, we had an issue with people coming in. They wanted to come in and permit
these things, but they didn't have the old one removed. So, they needed a place to store it temporarily. Um, and we had a storage facility that didn't have those uses explicit and they would park those temporarily, those double wides on that storage facility lot temporarily.
And then because there were heavy trucks coming in and out, it became it had adverse impacts in the community and the neighborhood. So, I just I've dealt with this um from being staff at a community that had to deal with those adverse impacts of staging of those mobile
homes. I don't think that that's going to be an issue, but I just want to make sure that that's not something that this can be used for. I don't exactly know 100% if you know someone be would be interested in storing you know a mobile home there for
you know 2 months while whatever but isn't this the right application for that in location and an access off of an arterial road um which has been designed for circulation to allow larger vehicles
to get in there and access it even if it is you for a couple months. Um, it seems like this is the appropriate location and it's, you know, screened in and above what is required by code. So, I
think this is the appropriate location. I don't, you know, whether it's a camper or a mobile home, isn't this where we would want to put this, >> Mr. Costa? >> Yeah. So, this is a
open lot facility. There's no coverage, no over no roofs, nothing canopies, nothing. >> It's just going to be storage. Pick up your stuff and go. So, you're looking at contractors, you're looking at homeowners, RVs, boats, jet skis, etc. My question is, and I wouldn't have a
problem with it, but we also have a a huge lack of storage, overnight storage for uh semi-rigs that come and go. I mean I get the calls all the time on all my vacant lands is hey can we park temporarily overnight and unfortunately the zoning is not there but I think in this particular case you might have that
and yes you're right you're shielded from ISB so the if your main entrance is off the back of the land road I mean it's basically not going to be seen other than you know than the vegetation as as far as I'm looking at it and I think yes there is a huge need for that and as LPGA subdivision continues to
grow and grow and grow with all the HOA restrictions that you can't park squat in your hard and much less have your garage door open more than 30 seconds without Karen knocking on your door. This becomes much more valuable. These particular sites become necessities.
>> Right. So I I'm I'm I would leave as is personally. >> Miss Bush. >> Yeah. Just to clarify more to to answer your question, the appropriate place for temporary parking mobile homes is either where they are constructed or where they
go to live. having a temporary location for them is what happens when people don't plan appropriately and that then it falls on the rest of us to have to deal with those impacts. So that's my point of saying that's not some I understand we need places to park all
the toys. I get that. Trust me, I have all the toys, right? Um so I'm not arguing that. I would even lean so far and say not a fan of the RV park or the uh truck parking, but I get it. We have a need. My my husband was an over the road trucker, so totally understand that. Um, but on the mobile home thing,
like I said, just because I had such an issue and I dealt with the community and how it had those inverse impacts after the fact, that's the reason I'm bringing that up. As a reminder, we are being asked to change the land use and the zoning on this property from something that is not quite as intense to
something that is more intense. Originally, this was intended to be neighborhood commercial, and that's not what this is. So yes, I agree now probably the context supports what you're asking for, but the community and the intent behind this was to not have this type of use. So that's my argument
and I will leave it there. >> Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Do we have any public participation for us for this case? >> No, sir. >> All right, sir. We'll give you an answer in a moment. All right. We're going to
close the for public participation and open up commission discussion or motion. I will state that that with the expense it would cost to park a mobile home there. I don't think it would be there that long if it were to be there at all. Um, and I don't know
what the difference between a mobile home and a and a tractor trailer would be to be very honest with you as long as it's not inhibited. In other words, people living there. >> So, I'm I'm in favor of leaving it in there. also along with Mr. Cton.
>> Yeah, just to just to clarify, so I'm not talking about a truck stop. I'm talking about an overnight. Some of the sometimes these truckers come in and they're idle for 3 to 4 days and you can't just park that in your standard subdivision. >> Uh and there is a very huge shortage on
uh on those kind of spaces available. There are some clandestine ones that you see around town, but uh legitimately permitted ones, I can't think of a single one, honestly. Okay, Miss Bush. Um, I'm sorry.
>> That was older, I think. >> Okay. All right. I'll entertain a motion if someone would like to throw one out there. >> Chairman, real quick, I do just have one note, and I was I apologize. as I was trying to pull it up just to confirm um and I did not see that language in the
PUD when I read it, but to um uh Steen Ashley's point um the the service and sales, >> do you know what page that was on? >> It's on page 14 of 36 of the PUD package and it's the change the permitted use
and strike the term uh wording of sales and rental under 1A. I I would like to um strike that from the pud. Okay. All right. Uh Mr. Costa, >> we have a question. >> The question on the service and sales.
So, are you prohibiting them having a uh a sales office on site? No. Well, there with the changes there wouldn't be any sales. There maybe an office do you check in if they wanted to do that. That's not the on the scope of the plan now. >> Well, it would be a leasing office or I
mean technically a sales leasing office on site would that would not >> well that that's different from what they're >> than what they're proposing >> because this statement would be you would be selling the automobiles, the boats, the RVs and that would change the concept of the use and layout and also parking and impact of the site. Should
we ask the applicant's opinion on this? >> Yes. Could I get you to come forward, sir? >> Steve Boswell, go ahead. >> Um, I don't believe we would be doing any type of actual sales sales um possibly an office for leasing, but currently right now it's just an open yard.
>> So, striking the sales and service you'd have no problem with. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. I'm good now. >> But you would still be allowed to have an office there to accommodate the rental. >> Oh, yes. Yes. >> Okay. It's just want to make >> 24-hour access.
>> Yeah, I would think so. That's an operational >> Yeah, >> I've seen a few of them, >> Miss Bush. >> Um, it was I thought it was Stephen again. >> On the >> It's on the PUD. It's on the
>> P. I'll make a motion on the CPA. We're ready. >> Okay, I'm ready. Hold on. Sorry. >> Did you Okay, go ahead, Mr. Costa. >> CPA25- Z007. I find that uh recommend that we find the future land use
amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and forward the application case number CPA25-007 to the county council with a recommendation of approval to submit to submit to the Valuchia Growth Management Commission for certification. >> Second.
I got a motion on the floor for the CPA 250007 as stated from Mr. Cost and a second from Miss Shelley. Uh, any discussion on the motion? >> All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I.
>> Motion carries 5 to one with Miss Bush and descent. >> Okay. And the PUD. >> Yes sir. Who wants to Who wants to handle that? We've already heard it. >> That was part You read it all in at the same time.
>> Oh, yes. I'm sorry. I'm just looking 26. Sorry, I'm moving ahead. >> I just need a motion for the PUD25006. I'll make a motion that case number PUD-25-00006 that we forward the resoning application case number PUD-25-006
to the county council for final action with a recommendation of approval striking sales and rental. >> Okay. >> Sales is it sales and service and rental? >> Hang on one second. >> We're trying
storage. So I think it's striking >> y >> if you would add if I could add this that we would strike the um heavy truck sales >> and uh well rental storage we leave right just just heavy truck sales is what we're removing. >> Yeah. >> Is that correct?
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Did we >> the suggestion was sales and rental? >> Sales and rental. >> That's what I wrote down. >> Food cover. >> Heavy truck sales and rental. Those are all one that runs together >> service. So I guess >> going to strike the sales and rental out of
>> sales service and rental brought in there as well, wasn't it? >> Well, let's agree on something. >> We're working on the the stuff there. >> It's retail. It's sales, retail, and or service. So it's just sales. >> We're striking this this >> and service and service.
>> Uh Mr. Chair, I think we need clarification on what what is being removed. Okay. Um, so what is can you can you say currently what that provision is going to um allow so that they know what they're voting on?
>> Okay. So right now if we are striking sales, rental and service, you're stating that the permitted use one of them is automobile, bicycle, boat, mobile home, motorcycle, recreational vehicle, trailer, light and heavy truck storage not including salvage or
junkyards. And that's it. >> Storage. Okay. >> All right. >> So, it's just for storage of all of those things. >> And that was my motion. >> That's the intent. That's what the intent we were trying to get to. Yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> So, where we at? >> So, what she said, >> put that
in my motion. Whatever it was. >> Thanks, man. >> All right, guys. >> We have a motion in a second. >> Yeah, we got a motion in a second. >> What are we striking? The sales and rental and services establishment. Mhm. Right. >> Three words.
>> There we go. And striking those three. >> All right. Okay. I have a motion on the floor to forward the reszoning application case PUD 250006 of the county council final action recommendation of approval with
striking out of the PUD the uh sales rental and services establish. >> Got it. All right. from Miss Shelley and a second. Who second that? Miss >> I'll second. >> I thought it was Miss Craig. >> Craig down there. She did. You second it
and Miss Craig second it. Okay. All right. Any discussion on the motion? >> Miss Bush. >> Yes. Thank you. Just for clarification, for full transparency. I'm not necessarily against the use. I'm just against the use of this location for the reasons that I've listed. So, um, like I
said, I understand the need. I just don't think that this is the best place for it based on the historical context of the community and um what I think the impact is to the neighborhood. So, thank you. >> Okay, your comment will take be taken into consideration, I'm sure. Okay, all
those in favor signify by saying I. Any opposed? >> I >> motion carries five to one with Miss Bush in descent. >> Okay, Miss Shel. Now, the next PUD. Yes, sir. Case number PUD-26-026,
a resoning from the urban multifamily residential R8 to a planned unit development with business subclass classification PUD. >> Okay. Thank you, Miss Shel. Mr. Jacus, this is yours. >> Joseph Jascula, Planer 2, for the
record. Um, good morning. Uh the applicant is proposing a resoning from urban multif family uh residential RA uh to a plan unit development with a business subclass to allow short-term rentals within the existing 55 unit condominium. The subject property is
located at 5499 South Atlantic Avenue a Avenue in New Beach approximately 1,000 square,000 ft south of the intersection of South Atlantic Avenue and Anglefish Avenue. The the request applies to an
approximate uh 2.59 acre parcel developed with a 12-story condominium including 55 dwelling units, um ground level parking, a property management office, a recreational uh amenities including swimming pool, tennis courts,
pickle ball courts, and shuffle boards. The condominium was originally developed in 1980 and has historic historically functioned as a family uh vacation development with with units used for both uh long-term and short-term. However, the short-term rentals defined
in um as res uh rental periods less than 30 days is classified as like a hotel motel uh use under the county code uh and is not permitted in RA. Um the applicant is seeking to reszone the property to the PUD with subclass in
order to formalize and allow the existing short-term rental activities. Uh no new development on the site or uh no new development or site modifications are proposed for this part of the quest. Applicant is limited to the addition of the short-term uh rentals for the
existing structure. The surrounding area is characterized in a pattern of high uh um intensity coastal development including multif family residential and tourist oriented uses. The property to the north shore by the sea condominium was reszoned in 2019 to a BPD similar to
this to allow short-term rentals. Um uh the the location itself is within uh flow zone ve as it's located near the beach. Uh environment uh permitting has reviewed the application has no objection. Any future construction or
clearing alteration has to follow the environmental provisions in the land development code and that goes with most standards. uh the existing development is considered non-conforming with respect to the uh to floor area ratio and parking standards. However, these
conditions were lawfully uh established prior to the current regulations and recognized through the proposed development agreement. Staff has reviewed the master development plan included development agreement and preliminary plan which governs the approval. staff found that the request
is consistent with the comprehensive plan compatible with the surrounding land use is not adversely does not adversely impact the public service and infrastructure or the environmental resource. Staff believes that all uh zoning amendment criteria has been met.
Um staff recommends forwarding the resoning application to the county council for final action with a recommendation approval with the following condition. I'm open for comment. >> Any questions for staff? Okay, hearing none. Is the applicant present?
>> Good morning. Could I get your name and address for the record, please? >> I'm Debbie Valley, and I live at 2305 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida, and I own one of the units in the property that we're talking about. >> Okay. You've heard the staff report. Anything you'd like to add to that?
>> No. Oh, okay. Any questions for the applicant? >> All right. Do we have any public participation? >> No, sir. >> All right. We're going to close the floor for public participation and open up for commission discussion. Give you an answer. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. We close the floor for public participation. I'll um either Miss Bush. I will um make a motion to um move case PUD26-026 uh forward that resoning application to
the county council for final action with a recommendation of approval. >> Second. >> Okay. I've got a motion on the floor from Miss Bush to forward the reszoning application case number PUD 26026 to County Council for final action
recommendation of approval and a second from Miss Shel. Any discussion on the motion, Miss Bush? >> Oh, okay. >> Well, you like that button, don't you? >> You don't even push the button. We're ready. >> I thought we was going to get through
it. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Okay. >> Be good at jeopardy or >> All right. Uh, Miss Shelley, read the case B26044,
please. >> Thank you. Case number V-26-044. Variances to the accessory structure requirements on urban single family residential R4 zoned property. >> Thank you, Miss Shelley. And this one is
Miss Tuckers. >> Good morning, members. Again, for the record, Kelly Tucker, Planner 1. The applicant is requesting two variances to reduce the minimum yards for a proposed 1500 square ft structure on urban single family R4 zoned property. Uh the R4
zoning classification has a front yard setback of 25 ft, a rear yard of 20 and a minimum of 8 ft with a combined total of 20 ft for the sideyard setbacks. The subject parcel is located on the east side of North Kepler Road, 375 ft north
of its intersection with North Palm A and Periwinkle Avenue. Uh it is lot 74 of the Lakeland Heights subdivision which was deemed vested and eligible for building permits on January 12th, 1981. Uh the proposed structure will be
replacing two accessory structures that are currently encroaching into the sideyard setback. Those structures did not receive building permits or variances for their location. The applicant is requesting the proposed location because there is a 3 to 4 foot decrease in elevation uh leading up
towards the northeast corner of the property uh which if you can see on the aerial map above there's a drainage pond that's about a parcel in between uh from where it's located. So the natural topography has a drainage for the water that leads into that body of water. Um
so the applicants want to avoid further disruption to that natural water flow. Uh variance one is to reduce the eastern rear yard from 20 feet to 5t. Variance two is to reduce the southyard setback
from 8 ft to 5 ft. Um staff's overall determination was to deny the variance request as it failed to meet at least three of the five criteria for granting said variance. However, staff to provide two conditions for PLDRC's consideration if they find that the applicant has
presented competent and substantial evidence. I'm available for any questions. >> Thank you, Miss Tucker. Any Miss Bush? >> Thank you, Chairman. Um, do you know the uh I know you guys don't the um buildable
area, sorry, the it's not the ISR, but your F essentially. Do you know what that is? with a percentage of the lot coverage with the proposed structure. >> Um, I can calculate it for you. >> Okay. I always ask. So, it would be really
beneficial if you could do those calculations for these types of requests. Um, I know it's probably nowhere near the ISR of 80% impervious surface ratio of 80% impervious. So, I'm not worried
about that. But I am curious because of how large the structure is if it is getting close to that percentage of the building coverage. The while you're looking that up, I'm looking at this area here 4500 square
foot >> in the red mark. >> That's where they came the >> the proposed 1500 square foot accessory structure. >> The image that you're looking at is where they can build based on setbacks. That was
this was exhibit A that was on the staff report showing the open area where they could potentially put the building and meet setbacks >> and meet the Yeah. >> meet the setback. >> Mhm.
>> Got it. It's unusual. Usually they put the proposed location. >> Member Bush. Um, it's about 19% with the proposed structure. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. >> 19%. 19%. >> Oh, I see. Okay.
>> Page seven. Yeah. >> Got it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions for staff? Is the applicant present? >> Could I get your name and address for the record? >> Uh Nicole Hill and it's 1251 North
Kepler Road, Zilland 32724. >> Okay. You've heard the staff report. Anything you'd like to add to it? >> Um the reason we're asking the variance that we're asking for with the percentage of like the 5T is because like she was saying in the back. So when it rains it floods in the yard. Can you
pull the mic closer to yourself? >> Yeah. >> So, when it rains, it floods in the backyard and then so that's why we can't put it on that side. And then also, we have a drain field in the back. >> So, we can we're only like if we were to do that size in the regular um
>> like limits that we're allotted, then it would go on top of our drain field. >> And we don't have anywhere to store our vehicles or toys as you were saying earlier, things like that. Um because we don't have a garage. When we bought our house, our garage had been closed in. >> So the reason you can't meet the
setbacks is because of the water, standing water in your yard when it rains, >> right? >> And also the your drain field setback, >> right? >> Got it. Okay. All right. Miss Bush, you had a question for that. Yeah, and I think you kind of
alluded to it, but you know, the garage is quite larger than the house. So, I was just wondering what the reasoning behind that size was. So, we have three vehicles. My husband has two. He's got two motorcycles. We've got four-wheelers for our kids. Um, we have a lot of
choice. And we don't have anywhere to store them other than our front yard because there's no parking or anything like that. He's got tools underneath the carport that we have now. He's got so many tools. Um, yeah. So, we just have a bunch of stuff and we have nowhere to
put anything. It's just all out. >> Okay. So, the 1600 ft² that you need is to store everything that you currently have, not necessarily. Okay. >> Yeah. Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Mr. Costa, >> the uh carport that's currently shown on
there, so that'll be coming down when this new structure goes up. Yes, the carport and the little uh metal shed will be coming down and everything that's under there and everything that's in the shed will be going inside of the um building >> and the carport was there when you purchased the property?
>> Um no, we had it and we just set it up. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> cuz it looks like it's right on the lot line as well. >> Mhm. >> So, it would be non-compliant as where it sits anyhow. Okay. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. >> One more question. One more. open pullb
barn or enclosed. >> Um on the side I think the building is an open open >> the open pull barn. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? >> All right. Do we have any public participation forms for this case?
>> No, sir. >> All right. We're going to close the floor for public participation and give you decision in just a moment. Okay. >> Okay. We're going to Miss Bush. I just for the record I just want to
make a comment that I did not agree with the staff analysis for criteria five. Um it mentioned that there were um non-permitted structures that were in the community and therefore it was in harmony with the surrounding community but those were unpermitted. So I
disagree just because there are structures there does not mean that that is harmonious with the community. So >> okay. All right. Any other comments or I'll entertain a motion.
>> I'll be glad to make a motion. >> Go ahead, Miss Shel. >> Uh that we case number V-26-044 variances to the accessory structure requirements on urban single family residential R4 zoned property be approved subject to the two staff
conditions. >> Second. Got a motion on the floor to approve V26044 variances one and two with the two staff conditions for Miss Shel and a second for Mr. Costa. Any discussion on the motion
hearing? None. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? >> Motion carries unanimously. Good luck. >> All right. Okay, that takes care of all the new business today. Is there any other
public items? >> No, sir. >> Do we have any staff items? >> No, we don't. >> Any staff comments? >> No, sir. >> Commission comments. Miss Craig,
>> I have a question I believe for staff regarding delivery of the packet. Um uh who else is getting besides who else is getting it by mail? How
um how's that work working for you? >> Uh I received my P I received my package on Friday of last week, but then again I I'm right down 44, so it's a pretty straight shot. But yeah, I received my package on Friday. I had it since Friday.
>> I got mine on Monday. >> Monday? >> Yeah. I say it arrived Friday because I picked it out. I picked it out of the mailbox on Saturday morning, but so it arrived Friday night or Friday sometime. >> The packages are put in the mailbox Wednesday afternoon after we've
published and printed all of the reports. Now, not to say that sometimes it's I get it that like day before the meeting it's happened as well, but uh this Yeah, this last one I did in fact get it. >> In that case, I'll extra drive across the county. Thank you.
>> Yeah, >> Miss Craig, does that mean that you want us to print the reports and you come and get them as opposed to putting yours in the mail? >> That's her current determination. >> Making sure. >> Okay, Miss Bush.
>> Thank you, chairman. Um, as um, Miss West suggested, I would like to bring up that conversation about the transparency of the mixed uses uh, within that mixeduse zoning district. I know there's others too, like the one in Ostein, which is when I became familiar with
that that that was a something that you all did, which I was unfamiliar with. Um, but it it's just not a very transparent process to the built environment and to people that are trying to utilize their property for the highest and best potential. How do they
know when that mix is something that's not kept publicly andor not transparent within um the the comp plan and or the code? So, that was my suggestion. If there's not an appetite for that, that's fine, especially right now with the preeemptions that we have. But I just if
we are trying to be businessfriendly and we are trying to support those types of developments coming in, then I do think that we need to be in complete transparency about what is allowed as far as that mix goes instead of having to do the calculations. >> Okay. Anything else?
>> That's all. >> Okay. Mr. Sixman, >> I'm good. I didn't I didn't touch that. somebody. >> Okay. Any other commission comments? >> Mr. Chair, is that was that a a motion for us to look at those mixed use uh
districts? We'd have to look at them individually because, you know, Yeah. >> Yeah. But if you would like us to formally start to look at it, you know, we'd appreciate a motion that gives us, you know, direction to uh bring it to our director and, you know, start the
process of of individually looking at those um mixeduse areas. >> Well, Mr. Sorya, let me ask you this. What is staff's opinion on that of looking at it now with everything that's coming? >> It really depends on how those things
are structured, what the existing uses are. Um you know the proposal is to remove minimum mixed mix mixes of uses. We don't know how that would affect the immediate area. Um doing so might have a
negative effect. Doing so might have a positive effect. You know you know SP 180 is always an issue. It's it's depending upon how it is worded and how it is structured. So, you know, it will take uh a case- by case analysis because
these mixeduse areas, they're kind of um they're supposed to be planned um and everyone's supposed to work together, but when you have these disperate ownership situations, then it becomes more complicated. Miss Bush, I don't know if you'd want to
make a motion or not, but I I we don't want to put staff through additional looks if it's not going to matter with what's being presented to us from the state level. >> I understand. And I think to um uh um
Mr. Sora's comment. I think you can craft the language to make sure that it is within the parameters of 180 because essentially I'm not suggesting that we change the mix at all. I'm just saying that we separate and clarify and whether or not that's going to have negative or
positive adverse impacts up for staff to determine. I bring this up because if if and not I bring this up because we constantly see and hear of people that want these types of these types of buildings, right? This is what sells. Um
and and it's harder and harder in to build that uh for a developer because they have to hire people like Mark Watts who is you know $300 $400 an hour and that takes a lot of small developers out of the equation. That takes mom and pop
people that might have a property in their in their possession that if they knew what they were doing and could read the code and understand that, then they might not have to hire individuals like an attorney to help them craft those that that development plan. Um, and so
anyway, I but I understand that we've also talked about many other things that I think are higher priorities for staff to review like the A1 zoning district and how many properties actually conform to the set, you know, the the size and dimension criteria of A1. Um, chairman,
you weren't here last meeting, but I did bring that up because we are constantly doing variances to setbacks in the A1, and those parcels are un they're not 10 acres. they're, you know, less than that. So, I asked staff, have we done that research as to how many parcels
within A1 are not the 10 acres and is it time for us to re-evaluate that? And I'll be honest with you, I think that is more important than personally looking at the mixed use. But it's all important because regardless, we're developing land within Valuchia County faster than
we understand what those those benefits andor consequences are. And I think that we have to do a deeper dive into some of these issues that we experience and the things that we discuss on this dis um quite often and and the community's comments and concerns especially as land
and resources become less and less available. >> Well, I think everyone knows my comments on the >> I know I know and that's why I didn't that's why I'm not formalizing a motion at this time on the mixed use. I'm just bringing it up in conversation. I do
think it'll be a challenge with SP 180 right now because that's a very fine line to walk and you're going to have to navigate that and I think you have enough on your plate Mr. Sora to deal with right now. Um I would and I can I ask I did make that motion last meeting right or a meeting prior to that on A1.
No, there wasn't. >> No, you did not uh make a motion. You had brought it up. We started some preliminary research that mapping gave it gave to us this week that I haven't been able to take a look at. But I what I want to do is bring back kind of a bulk number to you and then >> y'all can make a motion whether you want
us to move forward with something or not. >> Okay. >> Thank you for doing that preliminary research. I think that's going to be really helpful. So anyway, those are just my my comments right now. I think the one things that you know, the few things that we have them working on at a time are fine. Um, but something to consider, especially if we consider if
we start seeing more of these mixes and we're start seeing more of this type of development come in, then I do think that we should expedite that review. Just my professional opinion. >> Okay. Any other commission comments? Any Preston and citizen comments? This
meeting's adjourned. I don't my seat don't come back. >> Thank you for coming.