orange county planning and zoning commission (pzc) / …

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION / LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY Meeting of September 17, 2020 1

ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION (PZC) / LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY

(LPA) Meeting of September 17, 2020

The Orange County Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) / Local Planning Agency

(LPA) met at 9:00 a.m. on September 17, 2020, in the Orange County Commission

Chambers, 201 South Rosalind Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32801.

PRESENT: Diane Velazquez District 2 Eddie Fernandez (Vice Chairperson) District 3 Carlos Nazario District 4 Gordon Spears (Chairperson) District 5 JaJa Wade District 6 Mohammed Abdallah At Large Evelyn Cardenas At Large James Dunn District 1 ABSENT: Nelson Pena At Large ALSO PRESENT: Orange County Staff: Eric Raasch, Planning Administrator;

Jason Sorensen, Chief Planner; Nicolas Thalmueller, Planner; Nate Wicke, Planner; Irina Pashinina, Planner; Sapho Vatel, Planner; James Hartsfield, Planner; John Harbilas, Planner; Whitney Evers , Assistant County Attorney; Greg Golgowski, Chief Planner, and Terri-Lyn Pontius, Administrative Assistant.

Chairman Spears called the meeting to order. Following the Pledge of Allegiance, the

following agenda items were called:


APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Commissioner Valezquez to APPROVE the August 20, 2020 minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Nazario and was then approved unanimously on a 8-0 vote. Commissioner Pena was absent. OLD BUSINESS No old business was discussed. NEW BUSINESS No new business was discussed. 2020-2 Transmittal Regular Cycle Privately Initiated Map Amendment Amendment- 2020-2-A-2-1 Applicant: Momtaz Barq, Terra Max Engineering, Inc

Consideration: To change Future land use from Rural Settlement 1/2 (RS 1/2) and Rural Settlement 1/5 (RS 1/5) to Planned Development -Commercial Assisted Living Facility (Rural Settlement) (PD-C/ALF)

Location Generally located north of Clarcona-Ocoee Road, west of

Gilliam Road, and east of N. Apopka Vineland Road Tract Size: 47.94 gross acres Speakers: Momtax Barz (Applicant) Victor Chapman (Attorney for Applicant) Charles Secard (Opposed) Carol Basso (Opposed) Joseph Hardiman (Opposed) Leann Denney (Opposed) Debra Stewart (Opposed) Megan Anderson (In-Favor) Becky Wilson (Opposed) Charlie Hardiman (Opposed) Stacy Dees (Opposed) Noel Martin (Opposed)


Betty Jean Stone (Opposed) Ann Lucas (Opposed) Linda Michaelis (Opposed)

Mike Michaelis (Opposed) Ed Misicka (Opposed)

Linda Wolfe (Opposed) Action: Make a finding of inconsistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, find the proposed amendment not in compliance and recommend DENIAL to the Board of County Commissioners for Amendment 2020-2-A-2-1.

Motion /Second: Diane Velazquez / Jimmy Dunn AYE (voice vote): Diane Velazquez, Jimmy Dunn, Eddie Fernandez,

Mohammed Abdallah, Carlos Nazario, Gordon Spears, Evelyn Cardenas, and JaJa Wade

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena Staff Initiated Text Amendment Amendment 2020-2-B-FLUE-1 Consideration: Amendments to Future Land Use Element Policy FLU8.1.4

establishing the maximum densities and intensities for proposed Planned Developments within Orange County.

Location: Countywide Action: Make a finding of inconsistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, determine that the plan amendment is not in compliance and recommend that Text Amendment 2020-2-B-FLUE-1 NOT BE TRANSMITTED to include the development program for Amendment 2020-2-A-2-1 in Future Land Use Element Policy FLU8.1.4.

Motion / Second: Diane Velazquez / Carlos Nazario


AYE (voice vote): Diane Velazquez, Carlos Nazario, Mohammed Abdallah, Evelyn Cardenas, JaJa Wade, Eddie Fernandez, Gordon Spears, and Jimmy Dunn

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena Amendment 2020-2-B-CP-4 Consideration: Comprehensive Plan Administrative Clean up to the Aquifer

Recharge Element, Stormwater Element, Portable Water, Reclaim Water Element, and Solid Waste Element.

Location: Countywide Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, recommend TRANSMITTAL to the Board of County Commissioners for review.

Motion / Second: Mohammed Abdallah / Jimmy Dunn AYE (voice vote): Mohammed Abdallah, Jimmy Dunn, Evelyn Cardenas,

Gordon Spears, Carlos Nazario, Diane Velazquez, JaJa Wade, and Eddie Fernandez

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena

Amendment 2020-2-C-CP-5 Consideration: Comprehensive Plan Administrative clean up to the Future

Land Use Element, Economic, Public Schools Facilities Element, and Intergovernmental Coordination Element

Location: Countywide Action: Recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that

Amendment 2020-2C-CP-5 be TRANSMITTED to the reviewing agencies.


Motion / Second: Mohammed Abdallah / Diane Velazquez AYE (voice vote): Mohammed Abdallah, Diane Velazquez, Jimmy Dunn,

Eddie Fernandez, Evelyn Cardenas, Gordon Spears, Carlos Nazario, and JaJa Wade

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena Rezoning Public Hearings Philip L. Kruse, RZ-20-05-035, District 5 Applicant: Philip L. Kruse Consideration: To change the rezoning from R-1A (Single-Family Dwelling

District) to R-1 (Single-Family Dwelling District) for two (2) single-family homes (pending lot split).

Location: 5512 Barton Drive, or generally located west of Barton

Drive, approximately 780 feet north of E. Colonial Drive. Tract Size: 0.49 gross acres Speakers: Joe Kruse (Applicant) Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, and recommend APPROVAL of the requested R-1 (Single-Family Dwelling District) zoning.

Motion / Second: Gordon Spears/ Carlos Nazario AYE (voice vote): Gordon Spears, Carlos Nazario, Mohammed Abdallah,

Evelyn Cardenas, JaJa Wade, Jimmy Dunn, and Diane Velazquez

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena and Eddie Fernandez Dave Schmitt, RZ-20-09-057, District 6


Applicant: Dave Schmitt, Dave Schmitt Engineering, Inc Consideration: To rezone from C-3 (Wholesale Commercial District) to NC

(Neighborhood Center) for a storage facility and plastics manufacturing.

Location: 2580 S. Orange Blossom Trail, or generally located on the

west side of S. Orange Blossom Trail, approximately 365 feet north of W. Michigan Street

Tract Size: 1.72 gross acres Speakers: Dave Schmitt (Applicant) Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, and recommend APPROVAL of the requested NC (Neighborhood Center) zoning.

Motion / Second: JaJa Wade / Mohammed Abdallah

AYE (Voice vote): JaJa Wade, Mohammed Abdallah, Diane Velazquez, Evelyn Cardenas, Jimmy Dunn, Carlos Nazario, Eddie Fernandez, and Gordon Spears

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena Cyril M. Cruzada, RZ-20-09-058, District 5 Applicant: Cyri M. Cruzada Consideration: To change the rezone from P-O (Professional Office

District) to R-2 (Residential District) in order to construct a duplex on 0.27 gross acres and a triplex on 0.32 gross acres for a total of five (5) attached single-family dwelling units.

Location: 4987, 4995 Santa Rosa Drive, or generally located on the

north side of Santa Rosa Drive, approximately 570 feet east of Old Cheney Highway


Tract Size: 5.87 gross acres Speakers: Cyril M. Cruzada (Applicant) 1st Action: Make a finding of inconsistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, and recommend DENIAL of the requested R-2 (Residential District) zoning.

Motion/ Second: Gordon Spears / None

*Motion Failed for lack of a Second. 2nd Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, and recommend APPROVAL of the requested R-2 (Residential District) zoning.

Motion/ Second: Jimmy Dunn / Eddie Fernandez AYE (voice vote): Jimmy Dunn, Eddie Fernandez, JaJa Wade, Mohammed

Abdallah, Diane Velazquez, Carlos Nazario, and Evelyn Cardenas

NAY (voice vote): Gordon Spears Absent: Nelson Pena Francisco Manso, RZ-20-09-060, District 2 Applicant: Franciso Manso Consideration To rezone from C-3 (Wholesale Commercial District) to R-

1 (Single-Family Dwelling District) to renovate the existing house and conform with the Low Density Residential

Location 7120 Bledsoe Avenue, generally west of Bledsoe Avenue,

and approximately 160 feet southwest of Edgewater Drive Tract Size 0.14 gross acres Speakers: Francisco Manso (Applicant)


Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and recommend APPROVAL of the requested R-1 (Single Family Dwelling District).

Motion / Second: Diane Velazquez / Carlos Nazario AYE (voice vote): Diane Velazquez, Carlos Nazario, Gordon Spears, Jimmy

Dunn, Mohammed Abdallah, Evelyn Cardenas, and Eddie Fernandez

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena and JaJa Wade

Rebecca Wilson, RZ-20-09-061, District 2 Applicant: Rebecca Wilson, Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor &

Reed, P.A Consideration: To rezone from I-1/I-5 (Industrial District-Restricted) to I-

1/I-5 (Industrial District-Restricted) for the purpose of rental, sales, service and storage of cranes and other heavy construction equipment which will also include the accessory use of outdoor auto repair of heavy-duty trucks including but not limited to flatbeds, outdoor storage and outdoor display

Location: Energy Air Court, generally northeast of the Energy Air

Court and N. Pine Hills Road intersection. Tract Size: 3.47 gross acres Speakers: Rebecca Wilson (Applicant) Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive

Plan, and recommend APPROVAL of the requested I-1/I-5 (Industrial District) zoning, subject to the following restrictions and conditions:

Restrictions:

1. New billboards and pole signs shall be prohibited; and,


2. The applicant/ developer shall submit a site plan to demonstrate compliance with all Orange County Code requirements (including landscaping and paved surfaces) prior to the accommodations of any I-1/I-5 uses; and,

3. Parcels 31-21-29-2483-00-010, 31-21-29-2483-00-030 and 31-21-29-2483-00-020 shall be aggregated into one (1) lot prior to the issuance of any use permit; and,

4. Storage shall be located to the rear of on-site buildings and parking areas so as to not be adjacent to N. Pine Hills Road and Energy Air Court; and,

5. Any auto repair and service of heavy constructions equipment shall be allowed only inside an enclosed structure; and,

6. There shall be a ten-foot wide landscape buffer along the N. Pine Hills Road and Energy Air Court site perimeters. In addition to the shrubs and groundcovers as required by Code, the buffer shall include one (1) Understory tree between every Canopy tree (such canopy trees are required to be placed every 40 linear feet).

Motion / Second: Diane Velazquez / Jimmy Dunn AYE (voice vote): Diane Velazquez, Jimmy Dunn, Evelyn Cardenas,

Mohammed Abdallah, Gordon Spears, Eddie Fernandez, and Carlos Nazario

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena and JaJa Wade

Planned Development Rezoning Public Hearing: Geoffrey L. Summitt, LUP-19-10-347 District 1 Applicant: Geoffrey L. Summitt, P.E. GL Summitt Engineering, Inc. Project Name: Lake Roberts Reserve Planned Development (PD)


Consideration: To rezone from A-1 (Citrus Rural District) to PD (Planned Development District) in order to construct forty-one (41) single-family detached dwelling units. No waivers from Orange County Code are requested.

Location: Generally located west of Windermere Road, north of

McKinnon Road, and south of Stoneybrook West Parkway Tract Size: 78.53 gross acres

41.40 net developable acres Speakers: Geoffrey L Summitt (Applicant) Francis Dennaoui (In Favor) John Michael (Opposed) Andre Vidirne (Engineer for Applicant) Irene Penny (Opposed) Rick Martinez (In Favor) Al Hanson (In Favor) Robert Watson (In Favor) Steve Crimm (In Favor) Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan

and recommend APPROVAL of the Lake Roberts Reserve Planned Development / Land Use Plan (PD/LUP) dated “Received July 28, 2020”, subject to the following conditions:

1. Development shall conform to the Lake Roberts Reserve Land Use Plan

(LUP) dated "Received July 28, 2020," and shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and county laws, ordinances, and regulations, except to the extent that any applicable county laws, ordinances, or regulations are expressly waived or modified by any of these conditions. Accordingly, the PD may be developed in accordance with the uses, densities, and intensities described in such Land Use Plan, subject to those uses, densities, and intensities conforming with the restrictions and requirements found in the conditions of approval and complying with all applicable federal, state, and county laws, ordinances, and regulations, except to the extent that any applicable county laws, ordinances, or regulations are expressly waived or modified by any of these conditions. If the development is unable to achieve or obtain desired uses, densities, or intensities, the County is not under any obligation to grant any waivers or modifications to enable the developer to achieve or obtain those desired uses, densities, or intensities. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between a condition of approval and the land use


plan dated "Received July 28, 2020," the condition of approval shall control to the extent of such conflict or inconsistency.

2. This project shall comply with, adhere to, and not deviate from or otherwise

conflict with any verbal or written promise or representation made by the applicant (or authorized agent) to the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") at the public hearing where this development received final approval, where such promise or representation, whether oral or written, was relied upon by the Board in approving the development, could have reasonably been expected to have been relied upon by the Board in approving the development, or could have reasonably induced or otherwise influenced the Board to approve the development. In the event any such promise or representation is not complied with or adhered to, or the project deviates from or otherwise conflicts with such promise or representation, the County may withhold (or postpone issuance of) development permits and / or postpone the recording of (or refuse to record) the plat for the project. For purposes of this condition, a "promise" or "representation" shall be deemed to have been made to the Board by the applicant (or authorized agent) if it was expressly made to the Board at a public hearing where the development was considered and approved.

3. Pursuant to Section 125.022, Florida Statutes, issuance of this development

permit by the County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the County for issuance of the permit, or any other development order, if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. Pursuant to Section 125.022, the applicant shall obtain all other applicable state or federal permits before commencement of development.

4. Developer / Applicant has a continuing obligation and responsibility from the

date of approval of this land use plan to promptly disclose to the County any changes in ownership, encumbrances, or other matters of record affecting the property that is subject to the plan, and to resolve any issues that may be identified by the County as a result of any such changes. Developer / Applicant acknowledges and understands that any such changes are solely the Developer's / Applicant's obligation and responsibility to disclose and resolve, and that the Developer's / Applicant's failure to disclose and resolve any such changes to the satisfaction of the County may result in the County not issuing (or delaying issuance of) development permits, not recording (or delaying recording of) a plat for the property, or both.


5. Property that is required to be dedicated or otherwise conveyed to Orange County (by plat or other means) shall be free and clear of all encumbrances, except as may be acceptable to County and consistent with the anticipated use. Owner / Developer shall provide, at no cost to County, any and all easements required for approval of a project or necessary for relocation of existing easements, including any existing facilities, and shall be responsible for the full costs of any such relocation prior to Orange County's acceptance of the conveyance. Any encumbrances that are discovered after approval of a PD Land Use Plan shall be the responsibility of Owner / Developer to release and relocate, at no cost to County, prior to County's acceptance of conveyance. As part of the review process for construction plan approval(s), any required off-site easements identified by County must be conveyed to County prior to any such approval, or at a later date as determined by County. Any failure to comply with this condition may result in the withholding of development permits and plat approval(s).

6. A current Phase One Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and current title

opinion shall be submitted to the County for review as part of any Preliminary Subdivision Plan (PSP) and /or Development Plan (DP) submittal and must be approved prior to Preliminary Subdivision Plan (PSP) and /or Development Plan (DP) approval for any streets and/or tracts anticipated to be dedicated to the County and/or to the perpetual use of the public.

7. Prior to mass grading, clearing, grubbing or construction, the applicant is

hereby noticed that this site must comply with habitat protection regulations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC).

8. All acreages identified as conservation areas and wetland buffers are

considered approximate until finalized by a Conservation Area Determination (CAD) and a Conservation Area Impact (CAI) Permit. Approval of this plan does not authorize any direct or indirect conservation area impacts.

9. Lake Roberts has an established Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU) for the purpose of funding lake management services. To the extent this project is part of the taxing district or benefits from Lake Roberts, this project shall be required to be a participant.

10. Approval of this plan does not constitute approval of a permit for the

construction of a boat dock, boardwalk, observation pier, fishing pier, community pier or other similar permanently fixed or floating structures. Any person desiring to construct any of these structures shall apply to the Orange County Environmental Protection Division, as specified in Orange County


Code Chapter 15 Environmental Control, Article IX Dock Construction, prior to installation, for an Orange County Dock Construction Permit, as well as to any other Orange County Division(s) for any other applicable permits.

11. Approval of this plan does not constitute approval of a permit for the

construction of a boat ramp. Any person desiring to construct a boat ramp shall apply to the Orange County Environmental Protection Division as specified in Orange County Code Chapter 15 Environmental Control, Article XV Boat Ramps, prior to installation, for an Orange County Boat Ramp Facility Permit, as well as to any other Orange County Division(s) for any other applicable permits.

12. Unless the property is otherwise vested or exempt, the applicant must apply

for and obtain a capacity encumbrance letter prior to construction plan submittal and must apply for and obtain a capacity reservation certificate prior to approval of the plat. Nothing in this condition, and nothing in the decision to approve this land use plan/preliminary subdivision plan, shall be construed as a guarantee that the applicant will be able to satisfy the requirements for obtaining a capacity encumbrance letter or a capacity reservation certificate.

13. A Master Utility Plan (MUP) for the PD shall be submitted to Orange County

Utilities at least thirty (30) days prior to submittal of the first set of construction plans. Construction plans within this PD shall be consistent with an approved and up-to-date Master Utility Plan (MUP). MUP updates shall be submitted to Orange County Utilities at least thirty (30) days prior to the corresponding construction plan submittal. The MUP and updates must be approved prior to Construction Plan approval.

14. The developer shall obtain water and wastewater service from Orange County

Utilities subject to County rate resolutions and ordinances. 15. Short term/transient rental is prohibited. Length of stay shall be for 180

consecutive days or greater. 16. Tree removal/earthwork shall not occur unless and until construction plans for

the first Preliminary Subdivision Plan and/or Development Plan with a tree removal and mitigation plan have been approved by Orange County.

17. Walker Pond Road shall be improved to Orange County standards from Windermere Road to the entrance to the Development unless otherwise allowed by the County Engineer


18. Prior to construction plan approval, additional right-of-way for Walker Pond Road shall be dedicated to Orange County at no cost to the County.

19. The Walker Pond Road drainage treatment pond shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the County.

20) The following Education Condition of Approval shall apply:

a) Developer shall comply with all provisions of the Capacity Enhancement Agreement entered into with the Orange County School Board as of July 23, 2020, as may be amended.

b) Upon the County's receipt of written notice from Orange County Public Schools that the developer is in default or breach of the Capacity Enhancement Agreement, the County shall immediately cease issuing building permits for any residential units in excess of the six (6) residential units allowed under the zoning existing prior to the approval of the PD zoning. The County may again begin issuing building permits upon Orange County Public Schools' written notice to the County that the developer is no longer in breach or default of the Capacity Enhancement Agreement. The developer and its successor(s) and/or assign(s) under the Capacity Enhancement Agreement, shall indemnify and hold the County harmless from any third party claims, suits, or actions arising as a result of the act of ceasing the County's issuance of residential building permits.

c) Developer, and its successor(s) and/or assign(s) under the Capacity Enhancement Agreement, agrees that it shall not claim in any future litigation that the County's enforcement of any of these conditions are illegal, improper, unconstitutional, or a violation of developer's rights.

d) Orange County shall be held harmless by the developer and its successor(s) and/or assign(s) under the Capacity Enhancement Agreement, in any dispute between the developer and Orange County Public Schools over any interpretation or provision of the Capacity Enhancement Agreement.

e) Prior to or concurrently with the County's approval of the plat, documentation shall be provided from Orange County Public Schools that this project is in compliance with the Capacity Enhancement Agreement.

Motion / Second: Jimmy Dunn / JaJa Wade


AYE (voice vote): Jimmy Dunn, JaJa Wade, Diane Velazquez, Evelyn Cardenas, Gordon Spears, Carlos Nazario, and Eddie Fernandez

NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena (Mohammed Abdallah conflict of voting interest)

Small Scale Amendments with Concurrent Rezonings: 1. SS-20-07-048 & LUP-20-06-163 Rebecca Wilson, District 5 Applicant: Rebecca Wilson, Lowndes, Drosdick, Dostor, Kantor & Reed

P.A Consideration: A request to change future land use and rezoning of 3.82 gross

acres from IND (Industrial) to HDR (Student Housing) (High Density Residential) and rezone from R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District) to PD (Science & Technology Planned Development District) in order to construct a student housing project with a proposed 764 beds. The request also includes the following waivers from Orange County Code:

1. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (d) is requested to allow a

vegetative buffer in lieu of a six-foot high masonry, brick, or block wall along the boundaries of the student housing development located adjacent to right-of-way. This buffer will conform to the requirements found in Orange County Land Development Code Chapter 24-4 (a)(1).

2. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (h) is requested to allow the student housing buildings up to five (5) stories/fifty-five (55) feet with an additional 10' to accommodate stair well shafts, elevator shafts, and up to 16 mezzanine bedrooms in lieu of the maximum building height of three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.

3. A waiver from Section 38-1476 (A) is requested to allow 0.85 parking spaces per bedroom in lieu of one (1) space per bedroom.


4. A waiver from Section 38-1254(1) is requested to allow a twenty (20) foot PD perimeter setback in lieu of the twenty-five (25) foot PD perimeter setback.

5. A waiver from Section 38-1251 (B) is requested to allow a maximum building coverage of sixty-five (65) percent in lieu of the thirty (30) percent.

6. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (G) is requested to allow a

maximum density rate of 1 bedroom to count as one-quarter dwelling unit (1 bedroom =1/4 dwelling unit) in lieu of one-half dwelling unit.

7. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (C) is requested to allow a maximum number of bedrooms of 764 in lieu of the 750 maximum.

8. A waiver from Section 38-1272 (A)(1) is requested to allow maximum impervious coverage of eighty-five (85) percent in lieu of the seventy (70) percent.

9. A waiver from Section 38-1253 (B) is requested to allow the required recreation space to be calculated with a ratio of 2.25 acres per one thousand (1,000) projected population in lieu of the 2.5 acres per one thousand (1,000).

10. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (H) is requested to allow the parking garage up to six (6) stories/sixty-five (65) feet in lieu of the maximum building height of three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.

Location: 12175 Science Drive, generally located on the east side of Science Drive, on the west side of Technology Parkway, north of Challenger Parkway, south of Research Parkway

Tract Size: 3.82 gross acres Speakers: Rebecca Wilson (Applicant) SS-20-07-048 Motion:

Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and recommend ADOPTION of the requested HDR (Student Housing) (High Density Residential) Future Land Use.

Motion / Second: Gordon Spears / Jimmy Dunn


AYE (voice vote): Gordon Spears, Jimmy Dunn, Carlos Nazario, Mohammed Abdallah, Evelyn Cardenas, JaJa Wade, and Diane Velazquez

NAY (voice vote): None

Absent: Nelson Pena and Eddie Fernandez

Concurrent Rezoning LUP-20-06-163 Motion: Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan

and recommend APPROVAL of the Science and Technology Planned Development / Land Use Plan (PD/LUP) dated “Received September 1, 2020”, subject to the following conditions:

1. Development shall conform to the Science & Technology Land Use Plan (LUP) dated "Received September 1, 2020," and shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and county laws, ordinances, and regulations, except to the extent that any applicable county laws, ordinances, or regulations are expressly waived or modified by any of these conditions. Accordingly, the PD may be developed in accordance with the uses, densities, and intensities described in such Land Use Plan, subject to those uses, densities, and intensities conforming with the restrictions and requirements found in the conditions of approval and complying with all applicable federal, state, and county laws, ordinances, and regulations, except to the extent that any applicable county laws, ordinances, or regulations are expressly waived or modified by any of these conditions. If the development is unable to achieve or obtain desired uses, densities, or intensities, the County is not under any obligation to grant any waivers or modifications to enable the developer to achieve or obtain those desired uses, densities, or intensities. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between a condition of approval and the land use plan dated "Received September 1, 2020," the condition of approval shall control to the extent of such conflict or inconsistency.

2. This project shall comply with, adhere to, and not deviate from or otherwise conflict

with any verbal or written promise or representation made by the applicant (or authorized agent) to the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") at the public hearing where this development received final approval, where such promise or representation, whether oral or written, was relied upon by the Board in approving the development, could have reasonably been expected to have been relied upon by the Board in approving the development, or could have reasonably induced or otherwise influenced the Board to approve the development. In the event any such promise or representation is not complied with or adhered to, or the project deviates from or otherwise conflicts with such promise or representation, the County may withhold (or postpone issuance of) development permits and / or postpone the recording of (or refuse to record) the plat for the project. For purposes of this


condition, a "promise" or "representation" shall be deemed to have been made to the Board by the applicant (or authorized agent) if it was expressly made to the Board at a public hearing where the development was considered and approved.

3. Pursuant to Section 125.022, Florida Statutes, issuance of this development permit

by the County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the County for issuance of the permit, or any other development order, if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. Pursuant to Section 125.022, the applicant shall obtain all other applicable state or federal permits before commencement of development.

4. Developer / Applicant has a continuing obligation and responsibility from the date

of approval of this land use plan to promptly disclose to the County any changes in ownership, encumbrances, or other matters of record affecting the property that is subject to the plan, and to resolve any issues that may be identified by the County as a result of any such changes. Developer / Applicant acknowledges and understands that any such changes are solely the Developer's / Applicant's obligation and responsibility to disclose and resolve, and that the Developer's / Applicant's failure to disclose and resolve any such changes to the satisfaction of the County may result in the County not issuing (or delaying issuance of) development permits, not recording (or delaying recording of) a plat for the property, or both.

5. Property that is required to be dedicated or otherwise conveyed to Orange County

(by plat or other means) shall be free and clear of all encumbrances, except as may be acceptable to County and consistent with the anticipated use. Owner / Developer shall provide, at no cost to County, any and all easements required for approval of a project or necessary for relocation of existing easements, including any existing facilities, and shall be responsible for the full costs of any such relocation prior to Orange County's acceptance of the conveyance. Any encumbrances that are discovered after approval of a PD Land Use Plan shall be the responsibility of Owner / Developer to release and relocate, at no cost to County, prior to County's acceptance of conveyance. As part of the review process for construction plan approval(s), any required off-site easements identified by County must be conveyed to County prior to any such approval, or at a later date as determined by County. Any failure to comply with this condition may result in the withholding of development permits and plat approval(s).

6. A current Phase One Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and current title

opinion shall be submitted to the County for review as part of any Preliminary Subdivision Plan (PSP) and /or Development Plan (DP) submittal and must be approved prior to Preliminary Subdivision Plan (PSP) and /or Development Plan (DP) approval for any streets and/or tracts anticipated to be dedicated to the County and/or to the perpetual use of the public.


7. If this student housing use converts to a market rate multi-family use, then this PD shall comply with OCPS capacity review and enhancement procedures prior to scheduling for BCC.

8. Unless the property is otherwise vested or exempt, the applicant must apply for and

obtain a capacity encumbrance letter prior to construction plan submittal and must apply for and obtain a capacity reservation certificate prior to approval of the plat. Nothing in this condition, and nothing in the decision to approve this land use plan/preliminary subdivision plan, shall be construed as a guarantee that the applicant will be able to satisfy the requirements for obtaining a capacity encumbrance letter or a capacity reservation certificate.

9. Pole signs and billboards shall be prohibited. All other signage shall comply with

Chapter 31.5 of the Orange County Code. 10. Occupancy of this project shall be by verified students only; any other occupancy,

including but not limited to short term / transient rental, shall be prohibited. 11. Tree removal / earthwork shall not occur unless and until construction plans for the

first Preliminary Subdivision Plan and / or Development Plan with a tree removal and mitigation plan have been approved by Orange County.

12. The amendment to the territorial agreement between Orange County and Central

Florida Research Park must be approved by the BCC prior to approval of any construction plans within this PD. The amendment shall transfer the utilities service area to the County at no cost to the County.

13. The developer shall be responsible for all offsite improvements required for this PD

to connect to the Orange County Utilities water and wastewater systems, including the replacement of over ½-mile of existing public 4-inch wastewater forcemain on Science Drive and Lokanotosa Trail with a public wastewater forcemain with adequate capacity to accommodate the wastewater flow from this PD and the existing wastewater flow. The offsite improvements shall be constructed at no cost to the County.

14. The developer shall obtain water and wastewater service from Orange County

Utilities subject to County rate resolutions and ordinances. 15. A Master Utility Plan (MUP) for the PD shall be submitted to Orange County Utilities

at least thirty (30) days prior to submittal of the first set of construction plans. Construction plans within this PD shall be consistent with an approved and up-to-date Master Utility Plan (MUP). MUP updates shall be submitted to Orange County Utilities at least thirty (30) days prior to the corresponding construction plan submittal. The MUP and updates must be approved prior to Construction Plan approval.

16. The following waivers from Orange County Code are granted:


a. A waiver from Chapter 38-1259 (d) to allow a vegetative buffer in lieu of a six-

foot high masonry, brick, or block wall along the boundaries of the student housing development located adjacent to right-of-way. This buffer will conform to the requirements found in Orange County Land Development Code Chapter 24-4 (a)(1).

b. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (h) to allow the student housing buildings up to five (5) stories/fifty-five (55) feet with an additional 10' to accommodate stair well shafts, elevator shafts, and up to 16 mezzanine bedrooms in lieu of the maximum building height of three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.

c. A waiver from Section 38-1476 (A) to allow 0.85 parking spaces per bedroom

in lieu of one (1) space per bedroom.

d. A waiver from Section 38-1254(1) to allow a twenty (20) foot PD perimeter setback in lieu of the twenty-five (25) foot PD perimeter setback.

e. A waiver from Section 38-1251 (B) to allow a maximum building coverage of

sixty-five (65) percent in lieu of the thirty (30) percent.

f. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (G) to allow a maximum density rate of 1 bedroom to count as one-quarter dwelling unit (1 bedroom =1/4 dwelling unit) in lieu of one-half dwelling unit.

g. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (C) to allow a maximum number of bedrooms

of 764 in lieu of the 750 maximum.

h. A waiver from Section 38-1272 (A)(1) to allow maximum impervious coverage of eighty-five (85) percent in lieu of the seventy (70) percent.

i. A waiver from Section 38-1253 (B) to allow the required recreation space to be

calculated with a ratio of 2.25 acres per one thousand (1,000) projected population in lieu of the 2.5 acres per one thousand (1,000).

j. A waiver from Section 38-1259 (H) to allow the parking garage up to six (6)

stories/sixty-five (65) feet in lieu of the maximum building height of three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.

Motion /Second: Gordon Spears / Carlos Nazario AYE (voice vote) Gordon Spears, Carlos Nazario, Jimmy Dunn, JaJa Wade,

Mohammed Abdallah, Evelyn Cardenas, Diane Velazquez NAY (voice vote) None


Absent Nelson Pena and Eddie Fernandez 2. SS-20-09-059 Christopher Savino, District 6 Applicant: Christopher Savino, EIS Housing, LLC Consideration: A request to change the future land use from PD-Mini Storage

(Planned Development) to MHDR (Medium-High Density Residential) for the purpose of multiple-family residential (up to 35 units per acre).

Location: Generally located on the southeast corner of 45th Street and S.

Rio Grande Avenue Tract Size: 3.28 gross acres Speakers: Chris Savino (Applicant) Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan

and recommend ADOPTION of the requested Commercial (C) Future Land Use.

Motion / Second: JaJa Wade / Diane Velazquez

AYE (voice vote): JaJa Wade, Diane Velazquez, Jimmy Dunn, Carlos Nazario,

Mohammed Abdallah, Evelyn Cardenas, and Gordon Spears

NAY (voice vote): None

Absent: Nelson Pena and Eddie Fernandez

2020-2 Out of Cycle Staff Initiated Transmittal Regular Cycle Amendment

Amendment 2020-2-C-FLUE-2 Consideration: Text Amendment to the Future Land Use Element Policy

FLU8.2.5.1 to not require rezoning for properties with inconsistent zoning and future land use map designations when the proposed use is single family detached residential,


the zoning and future land use map designations are both residential and the lot is a lot of record, a lot created through a plat or a lot split as recognized by Orange County.

Location: Countywide Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan,

determine that the plan amendment is on compliance and recommend ADOPTION of Amendment 2020-2-C-FLUE-2, revising Future Land Use Element Policy FLU8.2.5.1.

Motion / Second: JaJa Wade / Diane Velazquez AYE (voice vote): JaJa Wade, Diane Velazquez, Jimmy Dunn, Carlos Nazario,

Mohammed Abdallah, Evelyn Cardenas, and Gordon Spears NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena and Eddie Fernandez Text Amendment 2020-C-PSFE-1 Consideration: Text Amendment to Public Schools Facilities Element Policy

PS6.3.1 addressing the ability of the Board to consider school overcrowding when reviewing certain rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment requests.

Location: Countywide Action: Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan,

determine that the plan amendment is in compliance and recommend ADOPTION of Amendment 2020-2-C-PSFE-1.

Motion / Second: Mohammed Abdallah / Jimmy Dunn AYE (voice vote): Mohammed Abdallah, Jimmy Dunn, Carlos Nazario, Diane

Velazquez, Evelyn Cardenas, Gordon Spears, and JaJa Wade NAY (voice vote): None Absent: Nelson Pena and Eddie Fernandez


MEETING ADJOURNED With no further business, Chairman Spears made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Dunn and passed with a 7-0 vote. The meeting adjourned at approximately 2:15 PM _______________________________ Gordon Spears, Chairperson _______________________________ Terri-Lyn Pontius, Recording Secretary

orange county planning and zoning commission (pzc) / …

Documents