►
From YouTube: Apopka Planning Commission Meeting September 8, 2020
Description
Apopka Planning Commission Meeting at City Hall on September 8, 2020 at 5:30 PM. To view the meeting agenda visit: http://www.apopka.net/agenda
#CityofApopkaFL #ApopkaPlanningCommission
A
A
A
A
If
not
do
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
them
as
submitted
a
motion
by
commissioner
washington?
Is
there
a
second
second
by
commissioner
guster?
We
have
a
motion
in
the
second,
all
in
favor,
say
aye,
any
opposed,
say
no,
and
that
carries
unanimously.
We
also
have
a
public
comment
period
at
this
time.
A
A
This
is
a
request
to
find
the
small-scale
future
land
use
amendment
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
compatible
with
the
character
of
the
surrounding
area
and
recommend
approval
of
the
small-scale
future
land
use
amendment
from
agriculture
to
industrial
max
0.60,
far
for
the
property
owned
by
randall
real
estate,
investments,
inc
and
located
east
of
clarcona
road
north
of
stone.
Road
we'll
proceed
with
the
staff
presentation.
C
C
C
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
rezone
the
property
to
il
light
industrial
district
which
will
be
presented
at
the
next
agenda
item
and
the
proposed
industrial
future
land
use
is
compatible
with
the
previously
mentioned
il
zoning.
In
addition,
industrial
industrially,
zoned
or
industrially
oriented
parcels
are
in
the
vicinity.
A
D
A
A
A
Okay,
our
next
item
for
this
same
property
is
a
request
to
find
the
proposed
change
of
zoning
from
a.g
agriculture
district
to
il
light
industrial
district
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
land
development
code,
and
to
recommend
approval
of
the
proposed
change
of
zoning
for
the
property
owned
by
randall
real
estate,
investments,
inc
and
located
east
of
clarcona
road
north
of
stone.
Road
we'll
have.
C
A
staff
presentation
for
the
record
phil
martinez,
planner
two
with
the
city's
planning
division.
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
rezoning
from
agriculture
district
to
il
light
industrial
district
for
the
same
property.
As
the
previous
agenda
item
highlighted
in
yellow
the
proposed
il
zoning
is
compatible
with
the
proposed
or
previously
proposed
industrial
feature.
A
Okay,
any
questions
of
staff;
okay,
thanks
and
the
applicants
available
for
questions
as
well.
Okay,
any
questions
of
the
applicant
okay,
we'll
close
the
presentations
open,
the
public
hearing.
Anyone
wish
to
appear
before
the
commission
on
this
item
and
seeing
none
will
close
the
public
hearing,
bring
it
back
to
the
commission.
What's
your.
F
G
pleasure
district
to
one
dash
l
light
industrial.
What's.
A
A
A
G
G
So
what
that
is
basically
capacity
is
the
school
board
will
take
a
look
at
a
project
whenever
they
apply
for
a
future
land
use
amendment
or
rezoning
and
they'll
check
to
see
if
there's
capacity
generated
by
that
increase
in
density.
That's
proposed
for
that.
So
that's
what
capacity
is
then.
You
have
concurrency
which
applies
at
plan
approval
state.
G
G
This
has
caused
residential
developers
to
either
withdraw
their
applications
or
wait
until
the
text
of
the
of
the
comprehensive
plan
has
been
amended
to
ensure
the
request
is
consistent
with
the
public
schools
facilities
element
of
the
comprehensive
plan
staff
is
proposing
this
text
amendment
to
the
comprehensive
plan
to
remove
language
related
to
ceas,
which
are
no
longer
entered
into
by
ocps.
So,
basically,
ceas
don't
exist
anymore.
So
that's
why
we're
changing
the
comprehensive
plan
to
take
that
out
of
this
orange
county
government?
The
amendment
that
you
have
before
you
this
language
is
word
for
word.
G
F
I
understand
you
no
longer
have
the
approval
of
the
orange
county
public
schools
project,
but
now
it
sounds
like
the
onus
will
be
on
the
city
council
to
go
forward
with
a
project.
G
F
G
Sure,
mr
washington
there's
a
couple
of
options
that
are
being
floated
around.
One
is
called
a
joint
approval
process.
This
has
been
floated
by
orange
county
public
schools.
I
believe
in
orange
county
government,
where
the,
if
you
have
a
school,
that's
in
an
unincorporated
area
of
the
county,
but
takes
projects,
that's
in
the
city
that
the
project
would
dump
into
that
school
orange
county
and
then
the
city
of
apopka
would
approve
the
rezoning
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
G
Amendment
request:
that's
one
option:
it's
not
been
laid
out
yet
so
it's
really
kind
of
up
in
the
air
as
to
what's
going
to
happen
with
that.
But
there
are
no
such
thing
as
ceas
anymore.
We've
had
last
month
we
had
a
project
that
was
going
to
come
before
you.
It's
called
cloant's
farm.
They
withdrew
due
to
this
requirement
because
they
needed
to
get
a
cea
and
they
were
told
they
couldn't
get
one.
G
It
could
be,
it
remains
to
be
seen.
Orange
county
is
the
only
county
that
I
know
of
in
the
state
of
florida
that
does
capacity
enhancement
agreements.
I've
worked
in
two
other
counties
in
central
florida,
where
you
just
go
straight
to
concurrency,
which
is
florida
law.
Basically,
your
project
either
satisfies
concurrency.
There's
going
to
be
enough
student
stations
in
the
system
to
accommodate
your
project,
or
it's
not
going
to
be
there's
not
going
to
be.
Then
you
have
to
enter
into
an
agreement
to
either
donate
land
or
pay
a
dollar
figure
capacity.
B
H
Mr
howell,
just
from
a
practical
standpoint,
how
many
times
would
you
say
historically
how
many
times
when
a
development
went
into
orange
county
schools
say
we
have
all
the
capacity
we
need
for
this
subdivision.
For
this.
G
Very
rarely
at
the
rezoning
or
comprehensive.
H
I
G
H
Well-
and
I
think
maybe
that's
aggravated
by
the
the
school
board-
doesn't
build
proactively.
In
other
words,
they
wait
and
react
after
the
fact
and
then
so
that
kind
of
puts
us
on
a
rock
in
a
hard
place,
in
other
words,
mr
washington,
that
the
school
board
never
said.
Well,
we
need
to
build
a
couple
schools
here,
because
this
area
is
growing.
H
H
I
In
the
way,
basically
and
the
way
that
florida
statutes
is
written,
they
basically
can't
build
proactively.
They
have
to
wait
until
you
have
until
they're
over
capacity
and
then
they
try
to
catch
up
and,
of
course
everybody
knows
it
takes
a
few
years
to
get
everything
approved
and
so.
A
The
way
we're
growing
that
bubble
is
going
to
get
bigger.
Probably
yes,
okay,
further
questions,
okay,
thank
you.
This
being
a
staff
item,
I
assume
there's
no
petitioner,
so
we
will
close
the
presentations
open.
The
public
hearing,
anyone
wish
to
appear
before
the
commission
on
this
item
and
seeing
none
I'll
bring
it
back
to
the
commission.
What's
your
pleasure.
J
A
Unanimously.
Okay.
Our
next
item
is
a
quasi-judicial
item
and
it's
a
request
to
approve
a
variance
of
the
apopka
code
of
ordinances,
part
three
land
development
code,
article
three
section
three
point:
3.3.4
point
c:
to
reduce
the
required
minimum
rear
yard
setback
from
25
feet
to
20
feet
for
the
property
owned
by
michael
and
laura
bogle
and
located
at
2936
ponca
meadow
drive.
A
C
The
subject:
property
is
highlighted
in
yellow
and
located
in
the
archival
run.
Phase
1
subdivision
article
3
section
3.3.4
point
c
requires
a
25
feet:
rear
yard
setback
in
the
rsf1a
zoning
district,
the
archival
run
phase
1
subdivision
had
the
r1
aaa
zoning
prior
to
the
adoption
of
the
new
land
development
code
on
march
6
2019,
the
r1
aaa
zoning
required
20
feet,
rear
yard
setbacks
and
the
applicant
is
requesting
a
variance
for
20
feet
regard
setback.
C
The
survey
shows
the
building
pad
for
lot
26
with
the
proposed
space
for
a
home
edition
and
the
proposed
20
feet.
4
inch,
rear
yard
setback
attached
to
the
staff
report
is
the
variance
process.
Also
attached
to
the
staff
report
are
the
applicant's
responses
to
the
nine
statements
of
competent,
substantial
evidence.
C
The
planning
commission
may
approve
approve
with
conditions
or
deny
the
variance
request,
and
this
concludes
my
presentation
and
the
applicant,
and
I
are
happy
to
address
any
questions
that
you
may
have.
K
I
don't
think
there's
a
set
of
there's,
not
a
set
definition
for
hardship
in
our
code.
What
I
think
is
you,
do
you
follow
the?
What
are
the
criteria
established
for
the
for
there
to
be
a
variant
for
a
variance
be
granted?
It
is
the
obligation
of
the
applicant
to
to
submit
competent,
substantial
evidence
to
support
their
requests
for
such
a
for
such
a
variance.
K
I
Well,
in
this
case,
as
phil
presented
during
his
presentation,
is
that
the
original
zoning
did
have
a
20-foot
setback
when
we
adopted
the
new
code
back
in
march
of
2019,
we
changed
a
few
of
the
zoning
categories.
We
combined
a
few
others
and
that
changed
the
zoning
in
that
district
in
that
area
to
25
feet.
I
So,
if
you
look
at
the
aerial
which
staff
did
there's
quite
a
few
homes
that
are
20
feet,
and
so
what
we
figured
is
that
they're
going
to
the
original
20
feet,
that
was
part
of
the
original
development
and
no
further,
I
mean
they're,
basically
matching
what
quite
a
few
of
their
neighbors
already
have.
No.
I
That's
why
we
have
the
glitch
amendments
that
we,
you
know
we're
we're
not
just
correcting
all
other
things,
but
we're
finding
the
other
things
that
we,
the
staff
believes,
could
be
a
problem
in
the
future,
so
we're
making
sure
that
we
correct
those
also.
J
Now
another
issue
here
is
there
would
have
to
be
no
legal
use
of
the
property
without
the
variance,
but
there
is
legal
use
of
property
there.
I
I
K
Variance
for
a
use,
variance
can
be
sought
for
other
for
certain
requirements,
such
as
setback
yard,
minimum
standard
minimum
design
standards,
but
you
cannot
seek
a
variance
for
use
which
would
mean
I
operate,
I'm
in
a
single
family
zone
district.
I
want
a
duplex,
hence
I'm
going
to
come
in
and
ask
for
variance
to
allow
me
to
have
a
duplex,
no,
because
there's
no
such
thing
as
a
use,
variance,
there's
a
variance
as
to
your
dimensional
structures,
but
not
as
to
how
you
use
that
structure.
K
A
special
exception
is
an
additional
use
in
which
the
the
code
has
allowed
for
another
use,
perhaps
a
little
more
intensive
than
those
that
are
permitted
by
right,
but
it's
only
such
a
uses
conditioned
on
you
meeting
certain
standards
in
order
to
operate
that
more
intensive
use
within
that
zoning
district.
So
variances
are
more
dimensional.
I
guess
perhaps
the
best
way
to
describe
it
while
a
special
exception
is
solely
limited
to
the
use
of
the
property.
K
Now,
if
I,
if
I,
if
I
have
a
use
for
a
special
exception
for
a
use,
that
is
a
little
more
intensive
and
I
get
the
approvals
and
now
the
building
I
send.
I
intend
to
build
on
that
structure
for
my
special
exception,
I'm
going
to
go
beyond
what
are
the
dimensional
requirements.
The
code
requires,
then
you're
going
to
seek
a
variance
for
your
special
exception,
but
the
best
the
easiest
and
clearest
way
to
to
distinguish
the
two
is
variances
relate
to
dimensional
and
special
exceptions
relate
to
the
uses
of
the
land.
J
Well,
I
don't
think
this
meets
all
the
criteria
of
a
hardship.
It's
bad
timing.
It's
self-imposed
one
of
the
one
of
the
explanations
was
there
were
plans.
You
have.
Is
that
hearsay
or
do
you
have
plans
dated
plans
whenever.
K
B
F
So
clearly
what
the
issue
is
so,
but
the
city
could
have
held
the
applicant
to
the
new
setback
if
they
wanted
to.
So,
even
though
the
applicant
started
the
planning
process
before
the
zoning
was
changed,
what
setbacks
would
change
the
city
could
say?
Well,
you
need
to.
I
Make
a
smaller
edition:
well,
they
they
did
not
come
in
before
the
code
was
changed
and
the
variance
is
the
channel
that
they
can
utilize
to
go
with
the
original
code
in
terms
of
the
setback.
That's
it's
their
out
their
option.
To
do
that,
the
other
option
would
have
been
to
allow
administration.
We
I,
as
the
community
development
director.
I
also
have
the
opportunity
to
grant
a
an
administrative
variance
of
a
maximum.
I
believe
it's
15,
which
does
not.
I
K
L
Record,
I
don't
necessarily
have
a
sorry.
My
name
is
michael
bogle,
my
wife
laura
and
I
own
the
property.
Don't
necessarily
have
a
presentation.
I
I
didn't
was
hoping.
I
didn't
need
one.
The
there
was
there
was
this.
The
whole
process
has
been
somewhat
of
a
comedy
of
errors.
I
did
contact
the
city
in
early
2019
and
obtained
the
setbacks
for
my
property,
which
were
then
told
me
25
in
the
front
10
on
the
sides
20
in
the
rear.
L
I
don't
want
to
throw
anybody
on
the
bus
and
I
don't
know
who
it
was
honestly
at
the
at
the
city,
but
when
we
reopened
to
do
these
plans
and
the
financials
came
back
into
play,
I
called
down
again
and
confirmed
the
setbacks
was
told
the
same
thing.
So
we
proceeded,
I
got
engineered
plans,
we
got
everything
engineered
everything
ready
to
be
able
to
pull
a
permit.
L
It
was
early
this
year
was
january
of
this
year
and
I
was
told
the
same
thing
and
mr
martinez
can
actually
testify
to
this.
When
I
received
the
denial
due
to
the
25-foot
setback,
I
called
mr
martinez
happened
to
be
the
one
to
answer
the
phone
and
without
telling
them
I
had
a
permit
on
application.
I
said
here
is
my
address.
L
Can
you
please
tell
me
my
setbacks
and
he
gave
me
25
in
the
front
10
on
the
sides
and
20
on
the
rear,
because
that's
what
his
system
told
him
and
that's
the
same
thing
I
was
told
in
january,
so
it
and
again
it's
not
mr
martinez's
fault
at
all.
He
was
looking
at
a
system,
that's
provided
to
him,
but
that's
what
was
in
the
system
and
that's
what
I
was
told.
F
All
right,
so
you
have
a
that's
a
nice
edition.
F
L
F
Guy
is
it,
does
the
driveway
provide
access
to
both
mirages.
L
Yes,
sir,
this
was
actually
not
the.
This
was
just
showing
the
what
you're
seeing
here
was
simply
a
surveyed.
Drawing
is
it
on
here?
Oh
okay,
oh
well,
yeah,
so
the
the
driveway
will.
Oh,
this
is
cool.
The.
L
A
All
right,
we'll
close
the
presentations
open,
the
public
hearing,
anyone
wish
to
appear
before
the
commission
on
this
item
and
seeing
none
I'll
bring
it
back
to
the
commission.
As
you
know,
on
this
is
a
two-step
process.
The
first
motion
is
to
show
that
the
need
arises
out
of
the
physical
surroundings
etc,
and
then
there's
a
second
motion
dealing
with
the
criteria.
So
do
I.
H
Have
a
motion
I'd
like
to
just
briefly
speak
sure,
a
little
discussion
before
I
know
we.
We
were
discussing
that
to
me
the
minutia
of
what
day
this
happened,
and
I
think
that
in
my
mind
and
mr
ryan's
question
about
his
hardship,
I
went
to
the
neighborhood
and
drove
through
the
neighborhood
and
looked
at
the
houses
on
his
street
adjacent
there's
a
lot
of
houses.
H
I
think
mr
hitt
referred
to
that
where
it
certainly
looks
like
they're
much
less
than
25
and
some
have
structures
addition
or
I
don't
know
necessarily
an
addition,
but
a
shed
or
an
overhang
or
a
porch,
that's
much
much
closer
than
that
and
I
think,
backing
away
from
the
the
little
stuff
in
my
mind
in
the
big
picture.
If,
if
you
buy
into
a
neighborhood
and
as
you
buy
in
it's
a
20-foot
set
back-
and
you
see
oh
the
neighbors
added
on
here
or
there,
oh
we're
going
to
have
a
kid.
H
Okay,
we're
gonna
add
on
okay.
We
can
do
this
and
you
kind
of
plant
it
out
in
your
head
and
whether
you
dot
the
eyes
and
cross
the
tees
with
the
city
prior
to
the
ordinance
changing
the
city
as
a
practical
matter
came
in
after
the
fact
when
they
they're
living
here.
We
can
do
this
this
this
and
this,
and
even
if
they
haven't
put
the
plans
in
in
their
mind,
we
can
build
this
addition,
and
in
this
case
the
applicant
had
already
had
the
plans
drawn
up
and
then
the
city
changes
the
rules
midstream.
H
Well,
that's
fine
for
for
new
subdivisions
going
forward,
but
I
don't
necessarily
think
the
rules
intent
was
to
go
to
older
subdivisions
and
stop
people
from
doing
what
have
been
done
all
along.
So
I
think
you
know
we're
dwelling
on
the
minutia
of
it,
but
the
practical
matter
is
that
the
guy
has
every
right
to
do
exactly
what
he
wants
and
a
variance
is
very
much
called
for.
In
this
case,
I
believe.
J
A
A
Now
the
second
part
of
this
relates
to
the
nine
conditions.
Do
I
have
a
motion
on
that.
E
E
A
J
Yeah
yeah
number
nine,
it's
minimum
I've
talked
about
doing
the
minimum.
I
I
don't
think
it's
or
minimum
variance.
I
I
don't
think
it's
a
minimum
variance,
but
I'm
gonna.
I
understand
the
situation
he's
in
and
what
the
city
happened
to
do,
and
so
I
do
want
to
point
out
number.
Nine
was
not
satisfied.
A
A
It's
a
request
to
approve
a
variance
of
the
code,
apoca
code
of
ordinances,
part
3,
land
development
code,
article
3,
section,
3.4.6,
point
c,
maximum
building
height
standards
to
allow
a
maximum
building
height
for
property
zone,
o
office
district
of
53
feet
for
property
owned
by
the
florida
conference
association
of
seventh
day
adventist
and
located
at
340
voter
road
and
again
I
would
ask
if
anyone
wishes
to
have
a
special
affected
party
status
on
this
item
in
seeing
none.
I
would
ask
commission
members
if
anyone
has
had
ex
parte
communications
on
this
item.
J
N
N
Office
zoning
district
permits
a
maximum
building
high
of
35
feet,
an
increase
in
the
maximum
building
height
to
53
feet
and
the
sub
on
the
subject.
Parcel
allows
for
the
height
of
the
additional
building
on
the
east
elevation
to
be
approximately
40
48
feet
tall
with
a
five
foot
tall
steeple
and
a
30
32
foot
tall
building
with
a
five
foot
tall
steeple
on
the
western
elevation.
N
N
Then,
once
a
positive
initial
determination
is
made,
the
commission
shall
make
positive
findings
that
the
applicant
demonstrates
there's
competent,
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
in
each
of
the
nine
items,
as
listed
in
the
staff
report
as
well.
The
development
review
committee
has
no
objection
to
the
applicant's
request
and
per
section
2.5.5
planning.
Commission
decision
shall
be
one
of
the
following
approval
of
the
variance
approval
of
the
variance
subject
to
modification
and
or
condition
or
denial
of
the
variance.
J
Yes,
I
have
some
questions.
The
pictures
I
see
the
new
building
seem
to
be
taller
than
the
old
building,
even
though
they're
on
the
same,
even
though
it's
from
the
west
side
is
that
true
is
the
pitch
of
the
roof.
Different
between
the
two
buildings
are
the
same.
N
One
one
side
is
taller,
it
is
hang
on
sorry.
N
N
O
My
address
is
in
orlando
is
a
actually
a
1032
homegrown
drive
in
winter
garden,
florida,
okay,.
O
So
we
have
the
well
I'm
looking
at
the
front
elevation
the
rear
elevation,
the
in
general,
the
overall.
That's
not
the
size
of.
J
J
Okay,
the
bottom
one
is
the
is
the
east
side,
another
west
side.
J
And
then
the
other
one,
why?
Why
is
the
new
the
new
building
taller
than
the
existing
building.
O
O
Project
phase,
one
was
the
offices
and
social
hall
which
were
currently
constructed
and
phase
two,
which
was
I
understand,
approved
at
the
time
and
permitted
was
the
church,
and
the
church
itself
is
what
we're
building
now
the
original
phase
ii
church
was
770
seats,
it
was
the
height,
it
was
actually
taller
than
this.
It
had
a
steeple
on
it
and
15
years
ago.
O
Financial
difficulties
prevented
the
church
from
building
phase
two,
so
I
was
hired
essentially
to
redesign
phase
two
to
a
smaller
building,
so
this
now
seats
a
little
less
than
500
people,
400
450
people,
that's
corrupt,
and
so
it's
a
little
bit
smaller
than
what
we
had
before.
It's
actually
shorter
than
what
we
had
before
as
well.
O
You
see
the
the
little
element
if
we
look
at
the
bottom
image
to
the
left,
there's
a
little
bumped
up
element
there
and
we
did
present
an
actual
rendering
with
this.
I'm
sorry
we
don't
have
it
handy,
but
on
the
left
on
the
bottom
image,
you'll
see
there's
a
little
bump
up
there,
which
is
a
short
steeple.
O
O
Yes
and
the
the
bigger
issue
with
this
side,
of
course,
is
the
great
difference
on
the
the
east
side,
and
so
you
can
see
on
the
east
side.
The
building
is
two
stories
on
the
west
side.
The
building
is
one
story.
B
O
I
H
I
A
F
H
No,
I
was
trying
to
cut
to
the
chase
we're
asking
for
three
feet
here:
yeah
and
and
then
mr
the
question
for
you:
what's
the
the
purpose
of
the
height
restrictions,
what
what
is
the
goal
of
that?
That.
I
I
H
No,
no,
I
understand,
and
again
I
looked
at
the
site-
and
my
point
was
that
that's
usually
when
there's
a
building
near
and
a
residential
area
where
people
don't
want
somebody
five
stories
up
next
door
to
them.
In
this
case
you
know
squirrels
and
birds
is
the
only
thing
is
next
door
to
us
right.
So.
F
Sure
so,
in
effect,
the
way
I
look
at
this
thing
is
that
because
the
land
drops
off,
you
need
the
bearings
for
the
higher
building
because
the
land
dropped
off,
but
the
ridgeline
is
almost
the
same
on.
I
E
E
A
Further
questions
of
either
the
staff
or
the
applicant
and
I'd
ask
the
applicant
if
you've
raised
everything
you
wanted
to
say:
yes,
okay!
Thank
you.
Okay,
we'll
close
the
presentations
open,
the
public
hearing.
Anyone
wish
to
appear
before
the
commission
on
this
item
in
seeing
none
I'll
bring
it
back
to
the
commission.
What's
your.
A
M
I
move
to
find
the
applicant
has
demonstrated
there
is
competent,
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
for
each
of
the
nine
variants
criteria
and
approved
requests
for
variants
of
the
apocal
code
of
ordinance,
part
3,
land
development
code,
article
3,
section,
3.4.6,
point
c,
maximum
building
height
standards
to
allow
maximum
building
height
for
property.
Zoned
o
office
district
of
53
feet
for
the
property
owned
by
florida
conference
association
of
seventh
day
advantage
and
located
at
340.