changes or anything we need to discuss prior to the meeting uh just one item that was advertised but it's not on the agenda that's ldct 2024 18. this was a change to land development code section 220. uh this is being continued to the november planning commission again it was advertised but it wasn't on the published agenda uh it's not on our agenda yes sir it it's at the top but not listed numerically okay um next i just reminder that the commission needs to elect officers at the end of the regular agenda right and um i believe mr zisco would like to address the commission real fast and turn it over to him thank you and uh just a couple quick announcements first we have a couple new members to the planning commission um but not new to the planning profession so mr merle bishop uh welcome uh interesting to see you on that side of the of the dais instead of out here with staff but uh thanks for for agreeing to help us this is an exciting time for the planning profession and certainly the the comprehensive plan of polk county and and having uh merle's expertise on the dais along with you all as we go through these updates i think is going to be very beneficial to all of us um of course um mr kevin updike was also appointed back to the planning commission in an alternate role um so wanted to welcome him um not here today but but certainly uh welcome him and then wanted to just give one other quick announcement uh unfortunately we don't have a lot of planners that that stay for 30 years in their career anymore and we received a resignation from one of our staff members so this will be melissa celestein's uh last planning commission meeting with us and she will move over to work for uh the polk county school board so i want to wish her well and uh that's all i've got for today okay great anything else before we close the workshop and open it up at nine o'clock meeting okay thank you at this time i'd like to call the october 2nd planning commission meeting to order here we have a roll call for determination of quorum please running heat here david dalton i am present brooke ignini mike hickman here merle bishop and mike schmidt and kevin updike is not present mr chair we have a quorum okay thank you at this time can we stand for the pledge of allegiance time to entertain a motion to approve the minutes for the uh september planning commission meeting so moved do i have a second all in favor say aye aye opposed motion carries thank you uh any any changes to the agenda for today no sir not to the ordered agenda just a quick note that the ldct 2024 18 this was advertised in the polk sun uh has been continued to november 6th so if anyone's here for that heads up but i doubt it okay anything else no sir okay at this time if you'd like to explain the general procedures to the audience thank you good morning general procedures the office of planning development will introduce the cases and disclose any responses to the notification which were not already provided to the planning commission in their packets the office of planning development will present their staff reports and recommendations anyone in the audience who wishes to speak and present testimony on a case will be sworn in the applicant or others in support or opposition of a case will be given an opportunity to speak the applicant will be given the opportunity to respond to any opposition testimony the commission will discuss this case and vote on the matter expedited hearing procedures expedited hearing procedures may be used by the planning commission under the following circumstances there are no there is no opposition to the case present at the hearing and the recommendation of the office of planning and development is for approval and all planning commissioner members present wish to use the procedure level three review pursuant to section 906 of the polk county land development code on level three reviews the planning commission may approve the applicant's request may deny the applicant's request or may approve the request with additional conditions pursuant to section 921 of the land development code the applicant or any substantially affected interest may apply may appeal the final decision of the planning commission to the polk county board of county commissioners by filing a formal application with the land development division and paying the application fee the appeal must be filed with the land development commission with with the land development division within seven calendar days of the planning commission hearing the board of county commissioners shall set a date and time for the de novo hearing if a party decides to appeal a decision made by the planning commission with respect to any level three review then he or she will need a record and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made the record includes all testimony and evidence given at the hearing each person or party who qualifies for to file such an appeal must independently exercise their right of appeal in order to preserve it a party cannot and should not rely on their right to appeal being preserved by someone else filing an appeal on the same matter please be advised that a party may withdraw their appeal to the board of county commissioners prior to that de novo hearing if one party withdraws withdraws their appeal on on a matter another part in another party fails to appeal there will be no appeal or hearing on the matter before the board of county commissioners the applicant the application fee will not necessarily be refunded for such a withdrawal please also be advised that if a de novo application is filed with the board to be recognized during the de novo hearing as organized opposition you must either file the application for de novo hearing or receive written authorization from from at least five entities or individuals to speak on their behalf against the application and they they have all agreed to waive their right to speak on the public comment prior to the public hearing level four reviews pursuant to section 907 of the polk county land development code the planning commissioner's decision on a level four review is a recommendation to the board of county commissioners the board of county commissioners will ultimately decide the matter swearing in mr chairman would you like me to swear in the witnesses for cases today yes please if you are going to address the planning commission on any case today then please stand raise your right hand and answer out loud to the following question do you swear and affirm that the evidence and testimony you'll give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you house items there are some housekeeping items i want to go through before we start first we need to admit the county's land planning planners as expert witnesses they have all been accepted as experts in the past however if you would like to void or void dire any of them as to their background or expertise then you may do so at this time without any opposition to their admission can we please have a motion to accept staff as experts in their field of land planning so moved do i have a second second motion is second all in favor say aye aye opposed motion carries thank you secondly if we have experts of applicants then you may tender them at this time or you can wait until your cases are called okay finally we must review quasi judicial cases quasi judicial cases mean the action entails applying land development policies to a specific development application in a fair and impartial manner the commissioner's review is limited to two areas first consistency and second compatibility consistency means the commission must determine whether the applicant is consistent with both the comprehensive plan and the land development code the staff report and presentation will provide expert analysis and opinion regarding the applicable criteria criteria as well as a recommendation on whether the application is consistent with these criteria regarding compatibility the commission must determine whether the application is compatible with surrounding areas the commission will be presented with testimony and evidence at the hearing both written and oral by law the only evidence the commission may consider is competent substantial evidence this means evidence that is sufficiently relevant and material that a reasonable mind would accept as adequate would accept it as adequate to support a conclusion the following items are are considered competent substantial evidence evidence that is fact-based and relevant to the applicable criteria staff reports and staff presentations citizen testimony may be competent substantial evidence so long as it is fact-based and can include testimony regarding subjective matters that do not require expertise such such as aesthetics and compatibility of a project with surrounding neighborhoods however popularity polls petitions testimony that is hypothetical speculative speculative based on fear or can are consistent of generalized statements that do not address land development code criteria are not competent substantial evidence for example fear that a project will cause increased traffic or crime is not competent substantial evidence lastly when expertise is required for technical issues like traffic engineering drainage wetland impacts school and utility capacity lighting and noise pollution are the applications impact on property values citizen testimony is not competent substantial evidence unless the witness is qualified as an expert in that area that concludes my comments thank you thank you is there any questions thank you at this time we're going to start with the first case eric but before you get started a couple of items please put your cell phones if you don't mind your cell phones on vibrate so that it doesn't interrupt uh you need any money that's speaking whether it be staff or the public and the other thing that we're very strict on is when you come up and speak for or against the case there is a three minute time limit and then it's strictly adhered to and at this time i'd like to go ahead and start the first case all right first on the agenda is ldcu 2024 27 and eric peterson is your planner good morning eric peterson for the land development division ldcu 2024-27 is a 30 million gallon per day water treatment plant with four ground storage tanks it also includes five lower florida aquifer raw water wells on september 13 306 mailers were sent to area property owners 11 boards were posted on the property on september 16th legal ad was published in the the polk sun on september 18th so far we've had no response in opposition we've talked to a lot of people about it the sites these are multiple sites the water treatment plant is located off of boy scout road the well sites are on walk in the water road in various locations and i'll go through and then there's two well sites on county road 630 east this is looking at the area and the well sites these are deep florida aquifer wells and i'll describe a little bit more the land use for the water treatment plant is institutional whereas the well sites are on agricultural residential rural the water treatment plants going to consist of a water treatment plant 30 million gallons per day you're approving 30 million gallons per day the first phase of the project is seven and a half million gallons uh as the project matures other uh lower florida raw water wells will be added but the plant's going to stay relatively the same and go by this site plan in the second phases or the first phases there will be at least two ground storage reservoirs uh the on latter phases additional ground storage will be added as needed this is what a typical well site looks like uh it's very subdued uh of course you're you're seeing this without the screening that will and the landscaping that will go around it uh it essentially is just going to be a driveway off off of the road and a turnaround there will be a generator associated with the well site equipment as well this is where the water treatment plant is off of boy scout road there's also a fire station that's uh going to be under construction soon uh that shares the same entrance of the water treatment plant site it's just uh north of jb's restaurant office 60. these are the two well sites on uh 6 30. uh county road 6 30. uh they're on either side of the entrance to the universal shooting academy this well site is uh midway up the lake walk in the water road on a vacant uh parcel that fronts the road there is a subdivision uh to the rear of it this is another well site that's just shout uh just south of wakeford road on walking the water road across from walking the water village and then the the two well sites where the test wells have been dug are at the entrance of walking the water estates on either side of the cypress wood drive entrance these are looking at the uh at the water treatment plant site it's hard to see the entrance from the road it's it's off uh and uh the grade is lower so you don't necessarily see it from the road there's a lot of vegetation that will remain this is this is where the water treatment plant will be there's not a raw water well it's the opposite there is a very deep 8 000 foot depth well that is used to uh dispose of the brine that is associated with the lower floridan aquifer it's it's not as pure as the upper floridan aquifer it has a high salinity rate so that extract has to be removed and then injected beneath the lower floridan aquifer well and that's what will be done on the well plant site this is what uh the uh one side i mentioned where they uh have dug the exploratory wells they will also be used this this is the main well it'll be 1400 feet deep the other two wells are for monitoring the upper part and the lower part of the upper floridan aquifer to make sure that any drawdowns from the lower floridan aquifer are not going to adversely affect the upper florida these this is what those well sites look like these are the other well sites they're in very remote areas uh they will be once again subdued it'll look like a a lift station from for the most part from the the roadway or from the neighbors staff recommends approval if i haven't gone into it enough and told you in previous meetings how we are limited by the use of the upper florida and aquifer come 2025 and we have to find alternative water sources uh this is this is our our first plant that will be generating that that alternative water source um it's needed uh and it the request is consistent both with the florida statutes comprehensive plan and land development code and with that i will stand for questions any questions of staff i have a question how many local governments i'm just curious how many local governments are a member of the cooperative i believe it was 18 is it so far that's all of them right but two isn't it um all yes this is all all but two there's various degrees of participation some you know full participation some will be uh have to buy in to to the well uh mark addison and mary west uh both representing the uh polk regional water cooperative are here if you want to ask so this is sort of this is sort of a milestone in terms of moving forward with this i mean this is a pretty big deal yes this is a very big deal this is the new era of water use in both the county and the state and the region the upper florida and aquifer has reached its limits we we can't afford to uh to uh tap into it for more uh capacity i'll let mark elaborate if you'd like to hear thank you eric uh mark addison uh i am the project manager for the southeast wellfield project so um thank you for your your consideration i'll entertain any questions any other questions of staff or the expert witness okay thank you at this at this time i'm going to open it up to the public is there anyone in the audience that would like to come up and speak for or against this case make sure you tell us your name and address for the record and keep in mind there's a three minute time limit three minute clock glenn law horn 11 000 jim edwards road haynes city um i've been kind of following this prwc project and as a whole this is a really bad idea really bad you're going to start pulling water out from underneath the upper floridian aquifer that's hard to say so you're going to start creating a void under there um the water treatment facilities where they're pouring sewage water back down into the deep well injection sites goes into that same thing i wish i had i didn't know i was going to speak on this today so i'm very unprepared i was in continuing education last night with bob kessler ceu at the university of florida and i saw the hydrology reports on this and it's not a very good idea to be pulling that kind of water out not to mention the fact that the price overruns that we're already on now are projecting this water is going to be 15 cent a gallon time it gets to the to the consumer so a hundred gallon shower just cost you 15 bucks so there's a lot of reasons not to do this the main reason i'm against it we got too many people here now we got to quit developing on what we're doing and this just got to stop all that there's a lot of people here that are here for the green leaf thing today i'm i'm against that too we don't need more people here that's too much demand we don't have that kind of water and pumping water out from basically the seabed is not a good idea so thank you for your time okay thank you anyone else name and address for the record please sir yes my name is mitch hutchcraft i'm with alico incorporated i'm based out of fort myers at 170 daniels interstate court drive we are property owner immediately adjacent to the proposed uh facility i'm here just to learn more about it so i appreciate the opportunity to learn and i'll follow up with staff afterwards thank you very much okay thank you anyone else in the audience good morning thanks for the opportunity i'm my name is robert allen and i live at 100 fawn court and i have extreme concern for our fraud aquifer i see this as a very bad idea we all know we have to find an alternative but drilling that deep taking it and desalinating it is not the answer and development is out of control we all know that i'm here for for another project to develop but we've got to do something about this water there are better ways okay thank you anyone else in the audience davis 35 20 walking water it's going to be right next door to one of them wells you're planning on digging which i think is a really bad idea there's no reason for this if where are you pumping all this water up to davenport why aren't they drilling the wells up there and these plants why isn't all that stuff going up there that land to value to build houses on i mean you're over building if you're doing this you're taking too much water out of ground and you're going to mess up my well down there i'm going to be really upset so i just think it's a really bad idea and i'm just really opposed to you drilling wells these wells in these facilities down there that's agricultural land down there you know you're messing with these people's property down here and their water supply so that's about all i got to say i just think it's a bad idea okay thank you anyone else see no i'm going to close the is this gentleman at this time i'm going to close the public portion of the meeting and bring it back to the staff uh or anyone i'd like to address any of the concerns that was brought up by the general public i'm going to have uh mary thomas she's with corolla engineers they're the engineering firm uh leading the design of the project speak to some of the resonant concerns good morning uh again mary thomas with corolla engineers um i'll i'll start by addressing can we get your address please uh my uh company address yes that's a great question i'm pretty sure it's 200 east robinson street uh orlando florida uh so i'll i'll start by addressing the concerns with the um the the well sites and why is it not drilled in davenport um as has been described this is a brackish uh groundwater source which means it's salty as mr peterson described these wells are around 1400 to 1700 feet deep which is quite a bit deeper than most of the wells that exist in the area now which are closer to 400 500 feet deep in the area and that's intentional the goal is to withdraw from a new source that is protective of the existing water supplies and of our natural systems our wetlands and our lake system so it is very uh intentional that these wells are drilled deeper with a goal of protecting exists existing water sources that's another reason reason it's in south uh east polk county uh the hydrogeology in davenport is less conducive to that very thick confining layer that exists in southeast uh polk county and that's another reason why the uh the proximity of the of the water supply and the wells are in this location again it's intended to avoid impacts to existing water supplies sure go ahead i would just like to add to that um from a permit perspective this project has had a water use permit from south florida water management district for some time now since 2014. that permit is very restrictive and requires monitoring of the upper floor and an aquifer and the surficial aquifer to ensure that we're not impacting those aquifers that the local residents may be depending on and if there is any significant impact the permit requires that we basically shut down our wells so as far as the concern to local impacts the permit is is very restrictive uh concerning that okay thank you how is the low the lower floridian recharged i mean you're we're withdrawing all this water so how does the what how does that aquifer how is it recharged it depends on the location there are uh some areas of the county where it's recharged by the upper floridan a lot of it is withdrawn laterally so over time you'll see salt water intrusion from the lateral lateral intrusion so it's not it's a it's a very slow process uh more so than the upper floridan recharges which would be more so from the surficial aquifer so it is somewhat from the upper floridan much of it is relic seawater and it will continue to be uh uh recharged by seawater as well any other questions could you speak into the microphone please yes sir i have spent about the last six days researching this since i received the agenda item and um i must agree with the gentlemen that have spoken here um paragraph one page 14 of our presentation says it's under the economic factors it says the other two meaning uh roads and wastewater can be manufactured or can be built we can build more highways we can build more streets we can build more wastewater plants but we cannot supply our own self water we are limited to what god gives us or mother nature however you want to say that or look at it um i wasn't even sure that this was a planning commission um issue except that we are the first voice of reason seemingly along the line we are the first level of accountability we are the first level of what i would call protection for all of polk county all of the people of polk county not just those that live up in that area and we're taking natural resources our water out from under the feet of every citizen in this county and other counties as well i i could again i i owned a process engineering company for years was a partner so i understand the process understand it probably too well more than i even want to understand it i could make my own presentation here as far as what's really happening um this is a very very bad idea there's no other way of saying it i'm sorry um we're pumping more out of the upper floridan aquifer to the point of 50 feet we're talking 30 million gallons a day let that sink in a day and as we remove the upper floridan aquifer by virtue of pumping saltwater intrusion comes in from the gulf laterally migrating through the lower floridan aquifer and then we're going to take that we're going to desalinate it correct me if i'm wrong with any of this we're going to desalinate it and then pump that brine that extremely high salinity brine solution back down in the water in the ground from where we're pulling this water now do you see the cycle that goes on there um again i wasn't sure that that the planning commission was even the place to address all of this because these are serious science issues um these are serious issues of engineering and um you you i i for i i'm compelled to express my reason for voting against it it has nothing really to do with the location of the wells or any of that stuff it's the whole of the process itself i'll just uh uh add that this is the the project will withdraw from the lower floridan only um and that is due to statutory caps on the upper floridan so the county and the central florida water initiative the five county area is capped on its upper floridan pumpage rate so there is no more upper floridan water being allocated by water management districts the source of this water is the lower floridan it is true that once the after the treatment process the brine solution is returned to the ground but it's uh to a depth of six thousand to eight thousand feet so there's no anticipated interaction between the salts that are removed from the water and then the water source itself anticipated being the key word there i just want to i guess maybe help put this in perspective because i think you're right i mean we're not being asked to decide on the project we're not being asked to make a decision on the science or the uh the viability i guess of the southwest or the south yeah the southeast regional wellfield we are being charged with is putting those facilities at the sites which is requires a conditional use approval that's what we're being asked whether or not the science works or not or is good or bad i think is beyond the scope of what we are are charged with making a decision on we're making a decision on the land use which is the wells and the the water treatment plant facility that's correct merlin and sometimes we get sideways only because we're we're emotionally involved in it but we got to remember one thing we're only here to approve or disapprove a conditional use for these well wells and in the in the treatment facility that's all we're here for any other questions of the staff yes i have one more please speak into the microphone this this affects the future of every one of the agenda items that we're going to be addressing today we're going to be looking at putting a 1500 more units here and there and all around and and at some point in time we have a fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of polk county to look out for their best interest regarding these very issues because you cannot separate them when it comes to water and natural resources that's how that that's what it says right there in uh economic factors paragraph one sentence four i challenge you to read it it's addressing those things and how this is all completely tied together i i would love that we could just separate it and say it's a zoning issue or a land use issue or something like that but that's why it's coming here to the planning because it is more regional in its planning i i guess than than we're willing to address that's it where has this been done before i'm sorry where has this been done before he said it's revolutionary uh i uh reverse osmosis uh is done along the coastline uh i think what makes this project unique is because it's so far inland there's a it's it's challenging to find a location for the brine disposal so the deep well in polk county is somewhat unique there are similar wells tico has a deep well so reverse osmosis is a time tested treatment technology the use of the lower floridan in the area is somewhat limited so this would be the first major uh project of its kind in the five county area there's one planned for osceola county the um the water cooperative of central florida is developing the cypress lake project which is a sister project to this one any other questions mr chair one last question for staff uh did you hear anything in the public testimony that changes your view on the case mr peterson no sir i just want to add though as far as relative uh concerns these raw water wells we have raw water wells in the middle of subdivisions all through this county and the residents living next to them might not even know they exist they're there uh they're very benign uh they don't make a lot of noise they don't have any odor uh it it's purely compatible with any nearby residential development these wells are actually farther from most residences than the wells we have at just name one bella toscano it's off of ron reagan parkway uh it's right in the middle of the subdivision and it looks like another building i just want to mention that sorry is the southeast get this right southeast regional water well or water what what do you call it cooperative is that part of the comprehensive plan yes it is mentioned directly in the comprehensive plan i cited in the staff report uh it's also uh this this whole activity of finding alternative water sources is supported by the florida statutes and given direction as well anything else from the board any questions of staff okay at this time i'm going to bring it back to the board for discussion and or a motion oh yeah i would just like to second what mr bishop said in regards of the scope of this board it's primarily just a land use issue for us um so with that being said i would like to make a motion to approve ldcu 2024-27 i'll second i got a motion second roll call please running heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brook ignini mike kickman moral bishop and mike schmidt against the motion mr chair it passes four two okay thank you all right number two on the agenda if i could interrupt you for just a second two things i just want to remind this this board is number one not remind but make a comment when we when we speak please i hate i hate to keep reminding you but we people may need to go back and review the minutes so if we could get everybody to speak directly into the microphone so that they can record that and number two i failed to acknowledge mr merle merle bishop's joining us on the on the commission today i'd appreciate your time on this board thanks merle okay all right number two on the agenda is ldcu 2023-53 and alia anglima is your planner good morning alia anglima with land development presenting number two on the agenda ldcu 2023-53 the dove meadow event facility the applicant is requesting a conditional use approval for an event facility an outdoor concert venue and an agriculture residential rural lane use district the subject site is located at 4581 dove meadow court south of dove meadow lane east of dove meadow court north of first street northwest and northwest of the city of lakeland in section 18 township 27 range 23 on september 13 25 mail mailers were sent to area property owners and one sign was posted on september 13th a legal ad was published in the polk sun on september 18th with three responses in opposition the subject site is located at 4581 dove meadow court northwest of the city of lakeland the site is approximately 25 acres and is in within a agricultural residential rule of future land use single-family homes can be found to the north west and south of the subject site while single-family homes are found nearby the majority of these homes are buffered by the thick trees that the subject parcel has the applicant provided a noise study and the noise study found and not to exceed high decibels for long periods of time the trees block a good portion of the sound that could occur on site here's a visual of the surrounding area the closest home is approximately 353 feet away the applicant has provided an event management plan that addresses the traffic circulation plan to account for both attendees being dropped off those utilizing the on-site parking and has indicated adequate signage for guests to be directly directed appropriately throughout the site the request for an event facility an outdoor concert venue to allow events and weddings on site there is no outdoor amplified noise voice or live entertainment will be permitted after 9 pm as conditioned within the staff report here is a photo of the entrance where guests will arrive to park here is a photo of the second entrance looking south and north on dove meadow court and here is a visual of the home on site where the events will be held the acreage of the site and the natural trees to buffer the events from off-site make this request compatible through site design and conditions of approval staff finds the request is compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with the ldc and comprehensive plan and i'll stand for questions any questions any questions the staff see none okay thank you is the applicant available like to come up and present their case i can say is that um name and address for that oh i'm sure sure um dale mcquillen uh 4581 dove meadow court we've raised our family at this home and uh also have a landscape business here and really all i can say is i'm very excited about what's going on um since our last meeting we've kind of thought about um perhaps opening it to the senior citizens also and maybe trying to get them to go through what we've created there because it's a beautiful beautiful piece of property we've have deer since we've done some work there we've created a few water features from creeks and stuff just trying to make the creeks a little louder and we've actually brought deer into our property and so i'm just really excited about the whole venture ahead of us that's about all i want to say but um i think um for me some of the opposition to me we walked around the other day because we heard about the opposition um they feel like it's a concert venue and really we're more interested in the the wedding venue part of it than the concert you know we we love love and we we we want to just share our place with people is really all we're about really we we don't really have to have it for the money we just want to have fun with it is all any questions of the applicant i do okay haven't we seen this before yes sir yes and there was a question about the definition of event when you're holding events there and we we discussed you know that's possible to have mud bogs or what whatever i i remember that as i did i remember this what what is different here than than before well back in the day when my kids were young we had a lot of trails out there but we're not intending on inviting people to do that you know we don't want to be responsible for any injuries so we have no intentions whatsoever of having anything like that again it's going to be my wife and i and my daughter we just built a home for my daughter on site so she's going to kind of be looking over things right there on site as we move forward with this project she'll be the host of the whole whole project so is there a limitation to the use of this included in the proposal i didn't see it there is a limitation what you described previously that would be considered recreation um so like weddings and such that is what really um the use would be for this uh the outdoor concert venue is just bringing into the picture because of the noise that could occur on site and that's so that's why we bring in that as well one quick question are you is this are you building any new facilities for this no sir it's going to be either outside or inside existing it's going to be inside we're planning on perhaps you know bringing in and pavilions if they want to bring a tent in you know they can bring a tent and set it up but that's about all we're intending on doing i do want to point out that we did hear this previously and the only reason that we're hearing it again is because um it was not open for public comment previously so it's the same request nothing different so we're just allowing the public to comment this round any other questions of the applicant okay thank you at this time i'm going to open it up to the public is there anyone in the audience that would like to come and speak for or against this case seeing none i'm going to close it the public portion bring it back to the board for discussion and or a motion ldcu 2023-53 second an emotion saying a roll call please running heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brooke ignini mike hickman for the motion moral bishop and mike schmidt or the motion chair it passes 6-0 okay thank you next case please all right number three on the agenda is ldcu 2024-23 and alia and gleam is the planner good morning alia and gleam with land development presenting number three on the agenda ldcu 2024-23 the outdoor shed sales cu the applicant is requesting conditional use approval for retail outdoor sales and display the subject site is located south of state road 60 east of county line road west of bailey road north of turner road west of the city limits of mulberry and section 32 township 29 range 23 on september 13th 34 mailers were sent to area property owners one sign was posted on september 13th and a legal ad was published in the polk sun on september 18th with no responses from the public the subject site is located at 4280 west highway 60 and west of the city of mulberry the subject site is located in a commercial enclave future lane use and in a residential suburban future lane use the request will be compatible with the surrounding area as the site is relatively similar to the adjacent uses the site directly accesses state road 60 so a commercial use would be appropriate to the north west and east are uses such as a gas station a dollar general and a contractor's office the currents the site is currently developed with sheds sales in the front half of the lot as shown on the screen here's a view of the subject site and through site design and the conditions of approval staff finds the request is compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with the ldc and comprehensive plan and staff recommends approval of this application and i'll stand for questions any questions of staff seeing none is the applicant available would like to come up and present their case please right right here name and address for the record please sir i'm not the applicant the consultant but uh matt collins civil pe moody engineering address is 4000 florida 60 east mulberry florida 33860 and just uh we stand supportive of the staff's recommendation and just stand by for any questions any questions the applicant you know okay thank you at this time i'm going to open it up to the public is there anyone in the audience would like to come up speak for or against this case saying none i'm going to close i'm going to close the public portion and bring it back to the to the uh staff or the board for discussion into our motion mr chair i move to approve ldcu 2024-23 we got a motion do i have a second roll call please running heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brooke ignini for the motion mike hickman for the motion moral bishop and mike schmidt for the motion mr chair it passes 6-0 okay thank you next case please next case is a small-scale conference of plan amendment ldcpas 2024-16 and jp sims is the case planner good morning jp sims of land development uh item before you today ldcpas-2024-16 the dynaco llc cpa on september 13th we did send out 29 mailers to the area property owners we received no response we did post one sign on september 13th and the legal app was published in the polk sun on september 18th 2024. the site is located south of state road 60 east of county line road west of bailey road and north of turner road east of the mulberry city limits what we're requesting is to change a total of 0.8 acres on a parent two-acre parcel from residential suburban in the suburban development area to the linear commercial corridor in the suburban development area now this is literally right next door to the site we just saw in the last case so when you see this aerial oh we were just here so the yellow that's indicated on there is the overall parent parcel of two acres we're only changing the 0.8 acres it's indicated in red as policy 2.111 a3 and the land development code suggests you can expand linear commercial corridor only to act as infill which um you'll see on the future land use the parcel as just as indicated to the south of this is now commercial enclave and linear commercial corridor to the north so what we're acting is filling in the gap between the two commercial usages to allow expansion of the lcc and it can only go to the depth of what is currently there so as i mentioned before we're going to you know the southwest portion of the county over by mulberry so this is just context shot show you that there is commercial usages surrounding it more of a zoom into it parent parcels in yellow subject site is in red we have a contractor's office to the west dollar general to the north gas station to the northeast and now a shed sales to the southeast and like i mentioned before the gap the site is acting as a fill-in between two commercial usages so what we're doing is changing residential suburban to linear commercial corridor so changing it would only allow to change it to the depth of what is currently adjacent to the north and that would fill in the portion in front of it as well so this is looking southeast down state road 60 site is over to the right and then we're looking northwest on say road 60 you can see the contractor's office there behind the wall and then if you're looking directly at the site so the the building that they're currently using as an office is behind the trees but it will allow them to move it to the front part of the parcel so that it's within the lcc land use and then looking northwest from the site you can see the dollar general and the gas station from the front of the site so as i mentioned before it is abutted by several commercial usages already and it does directly access on the state road 60 which is an appropriate place for commercial usage there will be no impact to any of the schools as lcc does not typically generate any residential and then it's a minimal change from the amount of water and sewer that would normally be used for that site because it is such a small portion of the parcel that's being converted and there is available capacity on state road 60 in that link justification for approval as i mentioned before all the usages surrounding it on state road 60 are commercial in nature we're filling in the gap between a linear commercial corridor and a commercial enclave to make it all commercial right there and the land development code does state that expansion of lcc is permissible to act as an infill requirement so that's what we're doing with this and with that i will stand for question any questions of staff yes i you said this i'm sure i missed it uh tell me about access to this it looks like i mean it doesn't have direct access so it has like a little winding kind of driveway that goes to a shared access point is that i mean i'm just wondering is that appropriate so see the access point is right up here on 60 and it kind of split so they're using the access road on the right of way on the state right of way i'm just i'm just curious if that works uh to be honest i don't know off the top of my head i have to look that up for you any other questions okay thank you at this time i'm gonna is the applicant available like to come up and present their case tom good morning commissioners uh tom woodch tw land planning for the record i'm here to answer any questions you have on the site specifically addressing the um access issues and some of the um other history of the site so this parcel was formerly owned by the same person who owned to the north which is jointly lcc and oc that you'll see on the screen so just to the northwest i guess you'd say um and then years ago through family split they subdivide off this and that's why you have some sort of office use on the back for this uh they're an electrician uh they've been here on site for quite a while um but the family member to the the north northwest and then when that was all one entity they were using that same driveway to address uh your question mr bishop and so certainly you know as we all know there's going to be a driveway permit required for any future development of the site but as long as that you know joint agreement between the now new property owner to the northwest and this current property owner can maintain that relationship they'll continue to probably use that but it's not your typical access point that's correct and they will have to seek that driveway permit at the site development standard when they request that new development on the property um were there any other questions that i can ask answer this time so uh tom they anticipate moving their office onto that space but then they would have to get a permit to to move that and then have to answer the access to the property at that time right this is the first step in a chain of events that are going to occur to bring the property into you know commercial usage the first step is to of course get this land use amendment approved and then they will have to reconfigure things to move the offices around what we had originally applied for was the similar layout that you see to the north northwest with the office center in the rear that type of configuration was allowable in the previous comprehensive policy language but has been since adopted and now the office centers don't allow that sort of layout so we were looking at linear commercial quarter up against state road 60 with an office center as a nice transition use to the residential suburb in the back and that would have allowed us to remain in place to answer your question mr hickman and we wouldn't have had to have as much extra steps but we are not going to be able to achieve office center at this time we may go through another process to to achieve that like a transitional area development or something of that nature to allow for it to remain so but this is the first important step to say we have the linear commercial quarter up front that's one option to move the building go through that process get that all permitted or go through a transitional area development with a pd to the rear and allow that building to remain and then you'd still go through level two to to reconfigure all that but this is the first they likely would not allow their own access to that parcel off the state highway 60. correct i think you're gonna well no i think no i'm sorry if i misunderstood i think they're going to be they are going to be required to seek their own access i think you'll see from the aerial photo uh further to the left and right of this yeah thank you um that so so they that parcel could be a standalone with access to 60 then they'll have to seek their own permit for that and this is what occurred you can see the very top of the screen that development two doors to the northwest had their own access uh and each of these had their access if we can achieve some sort of joint access through an fdot requirement if they impose that on us we'll seek that but we're going to have to ask for our own driveway permit okay this is a complement amendment request correct can i make yes that's correct can i make one more comment um one of the things from a landing perspective that this does help to address the section 220 of the land development code uh talks about compatibility standards and imposes a 50-foot setback uh limitation on the property to the northwest of us and to the new ce that you see on the screen that's about to be approved so by making this lcc that would eliminate the imposition of a 50-foot compatibility setback to our neighboring properties to the north and west so it's really a better land use fit overall in the long scheme of things and we'll we definitely plan to address all the other land development code and fdot and access and drainage requirements at the next step in the process which is our level two review thank you any other questions of the applicant okay thank you at this time is uh at this time we want to open up to the public is there anybody in the audience that'd like to come up and speak for against this case seeing them we'll close the public portion bring it back to the board for discussion or a motion mr chair i move to approve ldc pas 2024-16 i've got a motion do i have a second motion saying a roll call please bernie heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brooke ignini mike kickman moral bishop and mike schmidt or the motion mr chair it passes 6-0 okay thank you next case please all right number five on the agenda is ldcu 2024-24 and melissa celestine will present good morning for the record melissa celestine with land development i will be presenting item agenda item number five which is going to be ldcu 2024-24 a request for a non-phosphate mining borrow pit on approximately 385 acres the request involves a road right-of-way setback reduction along nichols road and property line setback reductions the subject site is located north and west of nichols road south of state road 60 east of county line road south of the city city of mulberry in section six seven and eight township 30 range 23. for notification purposes 25 mailers were sent to area property owners on september 16th 2024 and nine signs were pub what were posted on september 17th 2024 and a legal ad was published in the polk sun on september 18th 2024 no um responsive have been received by staff the project area is located in the phosphate mining and agriculture residential rural land use district and the county's rural development area similar uses are located to the south and the east of the site as indicated here the nearest resident is over 500 feet to the west of old nichols road and 200 and about 240 feet to the north my wife pointed over here email correspondence with the city of mulberry indicated a conceptual plan development was approved on march 20th 2007 as a mixed-use residential community but identified no concerns with the proposed use here is an overview of the subject request the site shall be required to show compliance with the conditions of approval and all relevant sections of the land development code during the level 2 review process within the application the applicant has requested reductions in the right-of-way setbacks from 100 feet to 25 feet along nichols road and property line setbacks from 100 feet to 25 feet for a majority of the site over here it is a it's going to be 100 foot setback and then over here from the nearest property line it's going to be 200 feet according to the mining schedule mining will begin in the winter of 2024 and is anticipated to be completed in 2064. during that time it is estimated that 10 acres will be mined each year and reclamation will be completed in 2069. the applicant is proposing three access points along the frontage of nichols road and one access point along old nichols road the submitted reclamation plan and post closure plan proposes a future land use designation of industrial it is the applicant's intent to masquerade the site and utilize the field for site development within the allowable industrial uses if it were to be approved stormwater retention is also proposed within the industrial area and results in ponds which would result in ponds the following is going to be a set of site visit photos so this is looking directly off of nichols road you can see the subject site and then to the right is going to be the residential properties as well as the post office to the left is the subject site and this is looking from mosaic which you can see the subject property is behind that there is existing natural vegetation that will buffer the site along most of the property lines past aerials indicate that the subject property was on once a mining site mining operations are also located to the south in the east ingress and egress for the proposed project is along county maintained local commercial and collector roadways staff does find that the proposed request is consistent with the land development code and comprehensive plan and with that i will stand for questions any questions of staff yes what is that there's a there's a enclave in there a little out piece yeah right there what is that it was wetland so they didn't include it okay it's a different parcel is it owned by the same company no i do not believe so but they can confirm anyone else okay thank you at this time is the applicant available like to come up and present their case he's already here thank you commissioners um my name is tom mems i'm the owner of the property and our address is 439 south florida avenue lakeland florida as you can see this is the old agrafoss mining property as well as the chemical plant mobile chemical plant the um i thought it was important to give you an idea of what we're actually planning to do here over time as you can see it has extensive rail systems throughout this property and the um along the perimeter this is mosaic's former conserve plant directly to the south of that is their gyp stack this is a facility on site and our plan is is actually to redevelop this site it's um it has an existing rail line going through it right now we're planning to either refurbish some of these buildings and utilize them or to tear them down and put new industrial type buildings and uses within this area and that will be becoming before you guys in november so this will give you an idea of what's taken place out here for literally almost 100 years or more it's um so lots of work demolition will take place with the removal of these buildings to form a new industrial park over time the surrounding compatible uses you can see here is the mosaic gyp stack directly to the south um here is the the southern end of the property here directly to the north of the property is an existing sand mining operation as you can see this is an older photo a lot of this has already been mined the entrance to one of the sand mines is over here as well as over here would be the other one so you can see this one's already in existence these areas have already been mined almost that entire area to the left we believe that um it's our understanding that tico is looking at putting a solar farm over to the west of our location it's an existing shooting range now that i think their permits just sunset but tico has reached out to us about putting aerial layouts with regards to a potential solar farm over here and you can see here this is the extensive rail system that y'all will see more uh in november when we bring it back towards the commission so the the plan for this site is to redevelop this into an industrial site and as you guys know that it to ask for a sand mining or borrow pit permit you have to come before you guys for approval if it's in excess of 8 000 cubic yards which in this case when we remove certain areas for retention ponds or other types of uses that in fact would reach that threshold fairly easily so we are here to ask for that our plan is not to mine this entire site our plan is actually to make it say revitalize it back to industrial type uses and that's another hearing um but that will give you some overview of not just today's plan but what we're shooting for in the long range as well and i'd open up for any questions you guys have any questions of the applicant say no okay thank you at this time i'm going to open the public portion anybody in the audience that would like to come up and speak for or against this case seeing none i'm going to close the public portion staff you have a comment i do not okay i'm going to bring it back to the board for discussion and or motion move to approve ldcu 2024-24 second motion second roll call please running heath for the motion david all nine for the motion brook ignini mike hickman or the motion moral bishop and mike schmidt or the motion mr chair passes 60. okay great thank you uh next case please all right number six on the agenda is ldpd 2024 11 and kyle roguis is the planner good morning kyle roguis with land development presenting ldpd 2024-11 the watersong plan development modification the applicant is requesting a plan development modification to increase the commercial footprint from 5 000 square feet to 20 000 square feet to provide a neighborhood commercial use in a residential low l1x district on september 13th 24 mailers were sent to the area property owners two boards were posted on the property september 13th the legal ad was published in the polk sun news on september 18th we have received no response from the public staff finds this request compatible and consistent with the comprehensive plan and land and land development code staff recommends approval the subject site is 4.19 acres located off us highway 1792 north corner of deer run road north of the city of davenport south of ronald reagan parkway east of highway us 27 west of osceola county in section 24 township 26 range 27. the subject site is located in a residential low 1x land use district in the north ridge selected area plan the site was originally vested for 5 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial as part of the phase one watersong plan development along with seven sales center models a daycare center and 154 residential units today the watersong development would be defined as a residentially based mixed-use development currently built out to 212 residential units there is no commercial sales center models or daycare center is currently developed the surrounding area is primarily residential developments loffman oaks elementary school is half a mile north to the nearest bus stop at the corner of us highway 1792 and orange cosmos boulevard developing this strip of highway us 1792 will offer infrastructures such as sidewalks that will make it safer for children waiting for the bus or offer the alternative mode to walk to school currently there is no complete sidewalk connection from the bus stop to loffman oaks elementary school students who wait for the bus are forced to either stand in the grass or on the side of an arterial road development in this area will introduce parking lots enabling turnarounds for bus drivers therefore decreasing the traffic off the highway and increasing public safety the proposed development will also require water and sewer line extensions with the addition to a fire hydrant this can provide a greater service to the resident residential development to the east and south of the subject site remain on well and septic potential fire hazards can be prevented by the installation of a new fire hydrant creating a safer neighborhood the subject location was designated to be a commercial to act as a transitional buffer from the residential units to us highway 1792 the proposed development is not removing any residential or commercial use the proposed modification is only increasing the commercial footprint where the 5 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial was originally vested the site plan indicates the 20 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial the uses are non-binding and shall be determined by those allowed in the neighborhood activity center or convenience center future land use districts the site plan meets all residential low 1x and north ridge selected area plan setbacks the site plan shows that there will be access onto deer run road and us highway 1792 the surrounding area is primarily residential the closest commercial use to this subject site is 2.4 miles to the north all other commercial uses range from 4 to 7 miles away concentrated along us highway 27 and interstate 4 exits because of the commercial drought in the surrounding area of the water song development the local community must travel greater distances becoming more susceptible to traffic and longer travel time modifying the existing water song plan development to allow for 20 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial will provide a greater necessary service in this area promoting shorter commutes and thus less time spent in traffic in the surrounding roadways staff recommends approval the site was originally vested for 5 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial the modification is for an additional 15 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial requests meet the compatibility standards set in section 220 of the land development code and all required setbacks the modification is consistent with the criteria for convenience centers outlined in section 2.110 c of the comprehensive plan the development is 4.19 acres 20 000 square feet of gross leasable area road frontage on an arterial road and a minimum of 2 500 population support within a one mile radius today the water song development would be considered a residentially based mixed-use development offering both residential and commercials and with that i stand for questions any questions of staff seeing none okay thank you at this time is the applicant available like to present come up and present their case over here oh you need to use the okay my name is evan fudge with avid group located at uh 1337 south international parkway at lake mary florida the uh i have no additional presentation to provide i can't follow up to that kyle did a wonderful job and uh the only thing i'd like to follow up with though is just the driveway off 1792 we still have to permit that through fdot that's uh nothing intended for the county other than to acknowledge that we are planning one uh if you have any questions for me i'm happy to answer them any questions of the applicant a single ingress on off of 92 single direction yes absolutely direction single direction ingress only any other questions okay thank you at this time i'm going to open it up for the public is there anyone in the audience i'd like to come up straight for you for or against this case come up please come up with a microphone okay that's okay we need to get your name and address for the record please speak into the microphone thank you i'm deborah boyer i'm at 4114 us highway 17-92 north davenport i will be directly impacted by what they're proposing um and not only will i be directly impacted but all the water system that goes from my pond and then my creek that i take care of then it does a 90 degree angle all along behind this property that they intend to put businesses in a little strip mall that's what i was told so my concerns were right now they've just tore out all of the trees and everything and the hearing of course is today we tore out everything i talked to harold i believe his name is barrio and my concerns was the water this is a major water system that goes as i've said from my property the pond and directly affects um deer run community and the polk county just put a lot of money into new culverts so i'm concerned about this water has to move and i can't have it polluted or debris because then it'll back up and then it'll be problems for deer run i'm not in deer run i am my own entity so and yes the school is uh within one mile so i'm concerned about what he's going to put in the strip mall too because i said please don't put a smoke shop vape shop you know a sex toy shop you know that kind of stuff because i'm raising my grandson and i want to be safe i want my family safe and i want deer run safe and we can't handle really the traffic because mr barrio across the street has put together a truck parking lot thing and it's with a little service yesterday my daughter was trying to get to my house and the trucks come out and block the road we can't handle it and she could not get to me to get her daughter and because i was babysitting my granddaughter and then i had to take off to go get my grandson at loughman oaks we are so choked up with traffic it's crazy then if you're talking about going shopping we got a public's beautiful park plaza just two miles up the road this is not necessary to fit something in um but that's basically what i'm trying to tell you we don't need this we don't need this traffic and mr barrio across the road and he told me that he sold the properties oh i'm sorry you got to wrap it up uh but the trucks across the road and everything and the school and the school bus stop is in deer run okay it's not at the school so there this is going to affect the the kids going to school the bus is coming in and out and we have a lot of families and deer run okay thank you appreciate it can i ask her a question for you where is your property are you just south of this no i'm on the pond uh i don't i'm sorry the turn off that they're saying they're going to put in there's a driveway before that so that's going to affect me too because that's my driveway okay okay and you go all the way down there's three homes and i'm on the pond i have a beautiful beautiful place and i don't want it messed up okay great thank you where is your creek the water that you're speaking of at the beginning where is that located goes right in right into the water again back in front of the microphone please and uh and when i talked to mr barrio he said his name was hario harry he said he didn't care about that creek and he doesn't understand he hasn't put any preventative measures right now he's torn everything out there's no silk fence there's no there's no uh uh preventing any children from running in there he's had uh heavy equipment in there he's torn everything out and i asked him i says how much green are you going to have to have he's oh i guess i got to do a couple of trees okay that's that's not right they want to talk so we'll have to wrap it up there is a three minute time limit thank you does anybody want to give me three minutes hold on hold on hold on if you've got a comment you need to come up to the microphone give me your name and address for the record we're not going to have anybody yelling out from the crowd my name is dave adams i live at 113 deer run drive directly next to uh the proposed property change and i'm opposed to that change because of the impact that would have on my uh well water and uh the runoff the storm runoff that would come from having all these people uh move in there on an asphalt uh uh driveway but originally i moved there as a retirement place place that where i could uh retire comfortably and i didn't imagine retiring next to a strip mall or anything like that but that's all i have to say okay great thank you anyone else in the audience that would like to come up and speak yes okay hold on we've got someone else i've got some pictures well hold on just a second sir good morning everyone my name is alex motran i'm the developer on this property um not only here today as a developer but also address for the record please 3617 us highway 1792 north um here today as a developer but also as a resident of poe county um first i'd like to thank deborah for coming out here i think it is important for the residents to come here and speak their minds about the developments coming in close to their homes this area has seen tremendous residential growth over the past couple of years we've owned several hundred acres of land on 1792 when i first had the opportunity to acquire this property um we intended of putting us 200 000 square feet self-storage facility um eric has been phenomenal to work with and we had the first pre-app meeting we saw that the self-storage wasn't going to work out so then we sat down together and proposed either a 32 townhome project or the retail strip um i think we've had enough residential growth in the area and it's time for some retail um today we have providence with 6 000 units um either residents have to go all the way to posner park or they have to go all the way to champions gates um so i think proposing these smaller neighborhood commercial centers is is very important uh we sat down on the drc meeting about two months ago um girls spot i did an article on the project um and after that i've been getting emails almost every week about residents nearby excited about this um and whenever i'm on the property people stop by they ask questions um and i've never gotten any negative feedback until a couple of minutes ago but i think it is understandable now to answer the questions about the the clearing the trees um august 15th i asked evan our engineer if we could clear the property he says alex let me ask the county because each municipality works differently and then we asked eric eric are we allowed to do clearing and i have the emails eric just said if you're doing clearing grubbing you do not need a permit only for doing grading the only thing we did on the property is remove three big trees and a couple of pine trees using excavator and a chainsaw so the soil was not disturbed at all we just removed the trees in accordance with what the county got back to us um yeah oh go ahead she can show the picture i mean we just removed the trees um regarding the water evan might be better to speak on the water but we have a sufficient pond to sufficient pond amount to for all the storm water drainage the her lake on the back is not going to be impacted at all um but if you have any further questions evan will be pleased to to answer okay i have a question of him okay well well watersong have a direct access to this or will watersong have to go out on 1792 to get to this well watersong has their main access on orange cosmos right north of us uh this is part of water song but it won't be connected correct access wise no okay okay thank you uh is there anyone else in the audience sir you have you have trying to play the video this is crazy and it didn't keep them in order man you got slide nine which light are you looking for mix them all up you know you got slide right we'll do you want slide one the video so this is the first slide that i have one slide up there man and i'm gonna have to close this up there see it's got them all everywhere is that the one you're looking for yeah but how do i go from the next one to the next one i'll tell you while you're getting that getting that prepared is there anyone else in the audience that would like to come up and present or speak for against this case other than the applicant if the applicant could wait till we get all the comments i appreciate it okay my name is robert allen i live at 100 fawn court davenport florida thank you you're good please reset that i have the same concern as the young lady had with the water in the stormwater stormwater is highly contaminated this stormwater retention pond is right up against the creek she's talking about we all have private wells and i wish i could operate this better so i could show some of the other slides but we're we're a community that has 60 wells private wells some of them are within 50 feet of that creek when they do this stormwater that water's going to get in there poe county knows very well that you're looking for an alternative water source our groundwater is contaminated we drink from the groundwater our wells so when you do this and you cover all this land with impervious surface and build into a retention pond that retention pond is going to get in that creek and when you turn your well lawn 50 feet away you've got a good chance you're going to draw that water over to your well how much dewatering is going to happen on this property to get this done and like you said they're already out there clearing all of it and i know they're legal to do that they have the right to remove those trees but it's been stated that this is part of water song this property is not part of water song it's part of deer run so i don't know how it all of a a sudden became part of water songs you know planned development it's part of deer run always has been there's it's been sold multiple times but it was recently sold i don't know how it became water songs planned development when it was deer runs planned development this is right out front this is also where a bunch of illegal dumping went on that was never cleaned up that's the video this is on that property and it was all spread back across this property and nobody ever cleaned it up somehow the county got dismissed from the lawsuit that came with this i've been in front of the board of county commissioners four times over the last five years asking for this to be cleaned up it's never been cleaned up and now that they've removed the trees and started scraping around all this right white rock that you see in this video is spread across that property because it was never cleaned up the permit required to clean up this is horizontal drilling slurries we have no idea what's in it now it's been sold and now it's water song development no it's not y'all need to go back and really look at whose property and what planned development that was in it's water song i've been there since 1987. it's always been part of deer run not water song water song bought part of phase one all of phase two and all of phase three this was not part of that sale this sale this property was owned by cc investments i'm just concerned about our water the storm water flooding because this development is going to flood people in deer run and nobody's talking about it okay thank you thank you i have my drive back y'all can keep all that i'd like all of this part of the record okay thank you anyone else in the audience like to come and speak for against this case okay seeing none i'm going to close the public portion bring it back to the applicant to address any of the concerns we um we definitely heard some new items that we weren't expecting today uh but we do clearly understand some of the concerns that have been issued here i do want to amplify again that the pd does include this property as depicted in our staff report the uh as far as the land clearing goes i want to uh reiterate what our developer has indicated is that we have had coordination with the county uh in that process and the land is currently cleared um drainage being a big question here the plan that you currently see well it's not on the screen right now but the plan that we're currently uh proposing is conceptual level plan there are still other uh districts there's still other governmental entities that need input into this plan that pond is a filler based on a percentage of property and percentage of property that we're used to mitigating with with the water management districts so the thing is in the back of the property there is a 50 foot easement that uh basically covers for the uh for the canal for protecting the canal and stormwater easement basically um so our proposal was to put this stormwater and within that easement because it's a stormwater easement but maintaining a buffer between the two plus on top of that there is a 20 foot buffer requirement along that back property line so when the applicant comes in or i'm sorry when the developer comes in with the final plan it's going to have to meet the buffer requirements trees will be planted back into to buffer this facility from the residential across the canal stormwater the water that goes into these ponds have to meet the requirements of the water management district which is excuse me which is quite extensive these days and it's not the intent to um it is not the intent to cause an issue with groundwater we have to treat that water before it's discharged traffic we intend on capturing trips at this location uh a traffic study has not been completed as of yet um but it's our intention to capture local community traffic local you know neighbors that are out and that are inside the water song development or developments around or even deer run estates for that matter um quick convenient type of businesses we're not talking you know a retail grocery store in this location it's just not big enough for something like that we're talking about just local community commercial something that's convenient for the neighborhood without having to go a couple miles up the road and add traffic to 1792. uh and as that's pretty much covers the issues that i have heard this evening other than um obviously the issues of the wells that is great information uh to be provided and that is also part of the planning process for stormwater you know we have to identify those as we go and we have to make sure that we're separated at a certain buffer which is reviewed at level two whenever we come in in front of drc they are going to be looking for items like this as well and along with our uh water district permitting so let's talk about the stormwater situation that there was some concerns that you're permitting through the water management district if you could explain to the public or whoever was concerned about it that you have to match your pre-post development stage in other words you can't discharge any stormwater off your property that currently isn't being discharged today and that is correct uh you're very you're very correct about that and noticing that this property is vacant there is no impervious on the property currently we are having to treat 100 of what we're proposing prior to it leaving the site and uh as as we move forward that will definitely be an issue that will happen what we have to substantially address it we cannot get a permit to build this development without and without addressing that issue okay thank you can you can you again speak into the microphone sorry can you inform the public what treatment methods for this that you're that are required i cannot i'm not a stormwater engineer let's be clear and i'm not an engineer let's be clear on the record on that too i am a uh or i am a planner with our engineering firm i plan land uses okay and it wasn't the intention today to to get into the the the technicals of stormwater you know we're first looking at being able to just increase an entitlement that's already on the property as of today commercial can be built on that property and we're just looking at being able to build a realistically usable rentable sellable type of commercial development uh versus the maximum 5 000 square feet that's already in place and so just just to refocus that that's what we're here to discuss but moving forward there are checks and balances here that we have to meet to do this development and i just i i can't emphasize that enough and it's very strict standards there's been low changes on the stormwater stormwater requirements are much stricter than they used to be generally speaking two two questions impervious area what is the impervious area any idea uh meets code the uh we are not exceeding code we're not asking for any increase in impervious outside of what code allows us to outfall of that pond seems critical where what consideration is there for the outfall as of right now the pond is not final in design okay so i could not tell you if it's going to go towards the right of way or if it is going back towards the canal do you know where the creek or the whatever that canal is where's the discharge for that canal the general overall the entire system has not been evaluated as of yet all right merle was this always part of the water song pud that is correct it was part of phase one actually of the water song pd uh he had a pd map of that the original pd from the mid 90s there you go on the one that's labeled 89 there that little that little section that little panhandle section to the west there that is our property and we went back and forth during review process on extensively to make sure we're looking at the right part of the pd i feel better about it if you had direct access to water song i mean i understand your your um your your comment about internal capture but really it's not true internal capture because you still have to travel 1792 but it is i think a need in the area for some neighborhood commercial and yeah i'd feel better if you had true internal capture yeah and the network originally was designed and back in the mid 90s the network was originally designed for the access to be adjacent for water i'm sorry the access for water song to be adjacent to this property but as time moved on and development occurred they ended up shifting that main access north um leaving this property for a lack of better words segregated from the rest and um but it's still maintained and still is part of the pd i can't really go ahead sir go ahead just i got a question but you're showing an access to deer run road is that correct that is our main access is to deer run that would be the legal access and and also to 1792 we're proposing an ingress off of 1792 one way only in coming into the site uh realistically that's all we believe that we'd be able to permit that has not been permitted and we still need to approach the fdot about that that is conceptual in design that may not even happen in fact the um the lady here that was concerned with her driveway that's part of the reason why you know it's going to be reviewed during the fdot uh meetings because of separation distance um or possible improvements that are needed but the uh you have it over at that end to separate yourself from deer run road is that correct yeah it's we have to be a certain distance from deer run for that entryway but we have to be a certain distance from that driveway as well private drive so that at this point it's very conceptual in design it's it's not for sure that that access will even exist that would be a permit through dot that is correct that is a dot permit look i did want to point out that the parcel to the north across from deer on road that was the parcel that was originally designated for the daycare center once that parcel gets developed and built out whether it is for that daycare center or not we will require a cross access to that uh to that property so eventually once that property is developed there will be direct access to the um water song plan development is this the main egress for water song down pine run road the main egress for water song is going to be up north here at uh orange cosmos boulevard so this is the uh direct ingress correct we missed it okay any other questions of the applicant hear that see none okay thank you sir thank you thank you for taking our case into consideration okay at this point i'm going to bring it back to the board for discussion and or motion mr chair i'm going to approve ldpd 2024-11 second motion and second roll call please running heath with a motion david dalt nine for the motion brooke ignini mike kickman for the motion merle bishop and mike schmidt against the motion mr chair passes 5-1 okay thank you next case please all right number seven on the agenda is ldcu 2024-25 us highway 27 big box retail center and eric peterson will present eric peterson for the land development division ldcu 2024-25 is a request for retail above 65 000 square feet two gas stations a sign plan and a time extension from three to five years uh within an employment center district uh the property is approximately 56.71 acres 69 mailers were sent to neighboring property owners on september 13th eight boards were posted on the property on september 16th a legal ad was published in the lakeland ledger on september 18th so far we've had no response from the public submitted for the record you see the items listed below are in your legistar packet the site is just about a mile south of i-4 uh north of heinz city and davenport uh the city of heinz city is annexed into uh this area it it's the this corridor 27 is split between the green swamp area of critical state concern and horse creek that runs on the other side so it's almost uh like a coastal strand of uh uplands that separates those two watersheds site is located south of holly hill grove road two important into this request is holly hill grove road one uh is also being requested by the property owners to vacate this portion of the right-of-way you see to the immediately to the south uh is the intersection of ridgewood lakes boulevard that is a signalized intersection holly hill grove road two is just a flashing signal for our fire station but will be uh in improved with this development to a full signal the applicants proposing uh a substantial amount of of retail at this location it consists of two large big boxes this is a gas station and this is another gas station and in between it will be a mix of retail and restaurant out parcels they also propose a sign plan this sign plan is a reduction overall in the amount of potential signage they're consolidating most of the signage on these multi-tenant monument signs there will be two poll signs the rest will be monument signs consolidated so you won't have any other poll signs along the frontage of 27. the dimensions are included in your packet just in case you want the details but the each one of the signs is within the threshold of the employment center district standards it's just the their multi-tenant is is the main request in this sign plan it otherwise they would you know they would be free to uh have individual poll signs on each one of these properties for each one of the businesses so we look at that as a positive to the look of the site this is how the site plan lays out on the uh in the gap you see ridgewood lakes to the south here's hollyhill grove road number two this connects to a new development under underway called brentwood across the street is the fire station on cottonwood drive we also have water treatment plant nearby there will be a multitude of access points we're also requiring the cross access agreement uh easement here uh this will be later executed as fdot will ultimately change some of the roadway configurations on us 27 in the future these points are what the applicant has requested along 27 it's not a guarantee they'll get them all but they're included in your request if they lose one it will not come back to you for uh re-approval uh these two entrances one for the gas station and then one for the main thoroughfare that goes between the uh out parcels and the big box retail and lastly i remind you this this right-of-way will be closed this will be a cul-de-sac there will the properties to the west will not have access into the development there will be a cul-de-sac here uh in preliminary design they state that there's a going to be a significant grade change when they level out this property which is currently undulating so what uh this there'll be a significant gray difference between this cul-de-sac and the rear of the development this is what holly hill grove road number two looks like it's going to look a lot different after this development comes through there'll be multiple turn lanes and they um the road surface is currently being widened by the brentwood development from the current 20 feet to a 24 foot collector road standard as i mentioned before this is it's just a flashing signal for the fire fire station to exit when this development comes through it'll be a full signalized intersection to the north of the site is the future site you approved through a conditional use about two or three months ago for a gas station some other out parcels restaurant and also a multi-story self-storage facility this is the holly hill on the right is holly hill grove road two looking from the site there's a immediately to the west is a uh townhouse development the brentwood development i mentioned before their entrances are over here which is under development this is holly hill grove road number one this is going to be where the cul-de-sac will be located this is looking out from from the site at uh there's a apartment complex that's just just about to open uh this is where the future side of the gas station and the multi-story multi-story self-storage will be located so that would block any uh views to the uh residents to the north there's a awful lot of frontage on us 27 they could have um there's a potential for three separate access in addition to holly hill grove road number two the site will extend from holly hill grove road number two almost to the ridgewood lakes boulevard entrance this is a you know an excellent location for the marketing and a very good location for commercial at this juncture so with that i'll stand for questions our justification justification of approval and it is an extensive one because the employment center x district really wasn't intended for this level but it's a great location for it so the applicant is asking for this uh significant exception there are weaknesses in the infrastructure which i mentioned in the staff report as you've heard in any development we have on us 27 uh our wastewater treatment plant is under uh designed to be expanded so there will be wastewater capacity to serve the development all this development will need uh a multitude of traffic improvements to support it those will be done those will be required of the developer to ease the traffic uh going on to 27. have we said before with commercial it's not always such a a huge generator it can result in bringing trips off the system commercial located here will prevent a lot of vehicle trips going north to the i4 interchange in the posner area or south to haynes city so it will limit traffic that's currently going as all these residential developments are coming online this site is being requested because it is really just the only one left of its size that could support a commercial development of this so much has been developed residentially there's there's not a lot of land left between i4 and haynes city so this is like this is the last opportunity for something to go here uh the for instance the posner development it was planned for a lot more commercial but as you can see it's it's developed a good portion residential now they had that option residential always outpaces commercial and what we always have to do is be prepared to save some property because the development the residential development will come and then we'll realize gosh we need commercial and there's no land left we've experienced this in point sienna we're going to experience this in 27 if we don't enable this development to come through with that i'll stand for questions correct so this this is a pd that's a modification to the pd it's a conditional use i'm sorry yeah um but the the underlying land use is ecx correct yes the underlying but they're going to be relaxed as far as the the requirements of ecx yes uh the ecx district has an upper limit of 65 000 square feet right at that point it's an exception that they need to ask you for permission to do and that's what they're here that's 65 thousand square feet per business per building yes there's also a floor area ratio limitation it's not for the entire parcel no it would be for the entire that's not what was intended if they were to subdivide yes it would be 65 here 65 there but that's unfair if you have a 100 acre parcel you got the same limitations if you got a 10 acre parcel it was intended to be per retail use i'm just i'm just saying the uh what i have a question of him so tell me about us 27 as someone who travels us 27 as i'm sure we probably all do it's level of service f and it's constrained so i'm i am concerned that this is going to significantly add to traffic congestion because of additional lights additional intersections on 27. yes they included in your packet is a i would say a draft traffic analysis uh that uh addresses how they're going to mitigate uh that impact upon traffic like i said it's a given a take it's it's going to yes draw some traffic but it's also going to relieve some potential traffic that would be driving farther that balance has to be worked out those things can be addressed through intersection improvements along the roadway it doesn't require another lane there's a lot of improvements there's current improvements that are underway we we still have improvements to be made at citrus ridge drive minute made ramp number two is is going to have intersection improvements with these intersection improvements the existing residential development that's developing will be able to ease on to 27 quicker better when you add turn lanes you get more traffic through in a limited you know a lesser amount of time through the signal so so there's not as much red or green time to be dealt with uh on 27 that would slow the flow of traffic on 27 but this is all to be worked out and i i emphasize that the traffic study there is a draft but it's just a draft traffic study right now yes it has not been reviewed by either fdot or us however you know we're going to look at the traffic the day they open not now they're probably going to it'll take some time to get everything together and get through the process uh before they'll be able to implement their plans or finalize their level two plans so this is going to be quite an undertaking because it's such an extensive commercial property back to the issue of the ecx 15 they have the 15 cap too which goes hand in hand with the 65 so they're here also asking to go above the 15 cap per parcel those two kind of work together it's kind of like lot size and density 15 to 100 yes any other questions of staff okay thank you eric is the applicant available like to come up present their case 25 morning commissioners my name is robert volpe 119 south monroe street on behalf of the applicant i also have with me uh some other experts darren taylor who's our our planner on this project josh lockhart who is the engineer of record with cph and we have other experts if you have questions about the specifics i have some slides but they're similar to the ones you've just seen i would like to just address some of the questions that came up initially the 65 000 square feet is a requirement for conditional use approval actually all retail in ecx in the north ridge plan all retail over 5 000 square feet goes through some sort of conditional use approval process retail is an allowable use at this site and it is 65 000 square feet per building and then that goes through the conditional use process but it it's an allowable use as are many other commercial uses it's just for retail buildings over 65 000 square feet comes to you for conditional use uh for the far there's it's a 0.7 far um to your point this is a 56 acre site so a 0.7 far would allow up to over 1.7 million square feet of development that could be warehouse mini warehouse office hotel commercial retail any mix of those uses that are allowed in in ecx in the ecx district and we are requesting the uh the conditional use for uh two of the buildings over 65 000 square feet and a total of 489 000 square feet so you've you've seen the uh the conditional use site plan um we agree with staff and their recommendation of approval that staff did an excellent job of preparing this staff report it's 31 pages and includes um all of the explanation of consistency and compatibility um on the infrastructure requirements that is part of the level two site plan process we are asking for a uh a conditional use of five-year conditional use approval instead of the three years that's in the code that's to allow for for the site plans which will come for the the specific uh portions of this development you know over time uh within that five years so we're asking for that as well and there was also included the explanation of the sign plan which would be part of this conditional use and the gas station uses i would be happy to answer additional questions like i said i we could go through the area uh as was explained this is the last large piece of property that's available for commercial use in this area it's about equidistant between the i4 posner park area and the haynes city commercial so this immediate area if you can see on the the slide to the right all of those colored pieces are all residential uses there's town homes as you saw there's apartment complexes there's some single family that has been approved off of 27 for a few thousand units so this is right in the middle of of all of those residential uses in the area and and several miles from the main commercial uses the main retail uses which would be to the north and the south so this really offers that uh retail and services that can be offered in this area that really there's no other piece of property that could do that for this of this size again i'm happy to answer questions um you know about this any of the specifics we can i can bring up mr darren taylor who's our planner or josh lockhart who's our engineer to answer additional questions i appreciate your time any questions of the applicant see none okay thank you at this point i'm going to open the public portion there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this case see none i'm going to close the public portion bring it back to the the board for discussion and or a motion i i have a real problem with this okay um and mainly it's because of the traffic because we're talking about a link of 27 that's level of service f and it's not going to get any better so you know i understand about the improvements but i still think that the the intersections and the turning uh movements is going to be increased is just going to increase the congestion i'm also also concerned about the consistency with the uh employment center i think it's i think it's really i mean we're talking about going from 15 to 100 for retail commercial adding the gas stations which would weren't contemplated i don't think in the employment center so i i just think that it probably would have been better if it had been just a an application for a complaint amendment to a commercial district because this is it's all for all intent purposes this is the commercial district and not employment center so i'm not saying i'm opposed to it but i've got those main concerns about the traffic i mean we're talking about level service f and it's not going to get any better for several years until more roads can be built or improved mr chair 27 is awful yes we we do have a transportation engineer here um to answer specific questions if you if you'd like about the plan and the improvements um and the requirements there i i know you're you're well aware of those those i don't want to get into details i guess on that and on the on the ecx uh we spoke at length with staff about options for a pd um as you know this was pix and ecx and because of the allowable uses in ecx that was the recommendation from staff and we went through the comp plan amendment process with this board and with the county commission so i think years ago when they created ecx and and incorporated it they had different vision of what ecx would incorporate or become and i think that's evolved and changed over time and and it's got to the point now where the ecx condition if you will or whatever the requirements of ecx don't really fit what it is today that's just my opinion if i may shonda bennett um merle was director when we did the northridge sap and i was the cake one of the case planners on it so you write mr heath about that and since merle has left employment the issue is the employment aspect never realized itself right so and we couldn't really find land uses that met location criteria to make it commercial so we've amended the text in the policies for employment center over the years right okay thank you any other questions any other discussions and or motion mr mr chair i'll move to approve ldcu 2024-25 did we open this up to public hearing did i miss that yeah i thought i did nobody nobody responded nobody did yeah okay sorry about that that's okay you keep me on my toes i think i've done that once before we got a motion we have a second second got a motion saying a roll call please running heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brook ignini my kickman or the motion merle bishop and mike schmidt or the motion mr chair it passes 6-0 okay thank you next case please oh i did next case is ldcpas 2024-19 small scale conference of plan amendment and robert bolton is the case planner thank you for bearing with me while i find a slideshow good morning robert bolton with land development presenting ldcpas 2024-19 the lakeland highlands oc for the record 89 mailers were sent to pardon me uh area property owners no responses were received from the public one board was posted on site on september 13th 2024 a legal ad was published in polk sun on september 18th 2024 the applicant is requesting a future land use designation change from residential medium to office center in the transit support of development area the tsda on approximately 1.4 acres the subject's parent site and adjacent parcel to the west uh have previously requested change from rm to oc these requests have been adopted by the board of county commissioners the request we this request will be heard by the board of county commissioners on november 19th the subject site is located on the south side of state road 540 of the polk parkway east county road 37b lakeland highlands road west of us 98 and surrounded by the city limits of lakeland this is a 2023 context aerial the subject is outlined in red to the north is the townhouse development winter set to the east over here somewhere coming out of the picture uh is the village at lake highlands apartments to the south is the highland grove elementary school and to the west is the stony point subdivision this is a closer view of the site it should be noted that all access will be coming from lakeland highlands not highlands there won't be any access coming in from highland lake highland boulevard this is the current land use map these two sites right here have previously been changed to the oc and this area the this parcel is the request to go to office center and it this is what it will look like this will just help facilitate developing this as a commercial site instead of leaving 1.4 acres to try and do a small residential development in the back of office buildings on the front portion of this i believe we have level two plans in for a posh salon that's what sort of has started a number of these land use requests this is a site looking from lakeland highlands road the front portion of it would be the office currently off center with the rear of that being the land use request being rm this is lakeland highlands road looking northward with stony point over on the west or the the left-hand side of the picture lakeland highlands looking south the site is well serviced by public services with water and sewer to be provided by the city of lakeland the request is future land use designation change from residential medium to office center the site is a remainder of the original rm in the area the request will allow the parent parcel to develop as an office center that would support area residential the request is consistent with comprehensive plan and land development code with that i will stand for questions any questions of staff okay thank you the applicant available like to come up present their case good morning danny kovacs tracked engineering 5137 south lakeland drive uh robert did an excellent job at presenting the case so i'll stand by for any questions um our client is looking to seek this proposal as there's an orlando health that's coming in just up the road it just makes good planning sense to to do this so uh if you have any questions from uh from the board i'll be happy to answer them any questions of the applicant okay thank you thank you at this time i'm going to open the public portion here is there any anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this case uh seeing none i'm going to close the public portion bring it back to the board for discussion and or motion mr chairman i move that we approve the request from to change the land use from rm to office center got a motion we'll have a second second roll call please ernie heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brook ignini for the motion mike hickman for the motion moral bishop and mike schmidt for the motion chair passes 60. okay thank you next case please next case is a another small scale conference plan amendment ldcpas 2024-22 and ian nance will present the case mr chair like to make a motion to expedite a motion to expedite is there anyone in the uh do i have a second second is there anyone in the audience that would like to hear this case in its entirety seeing them i got a motion to expedite all in favor say aye aye opposed expedite please excellent just have one slide anyway here uh ian nance for the record uh this is ldcps 2024-22 the applicant is requesting a county initiate i'm sorry the county is asking for a small scale comprehensive plan amendment to change the future land use designation from residential medium to recreation open space at the lake blue park this is located south of havendale boulevard east of 42nd street and east auburndale in section 13 township 28 range 25 on september 13th 145 mailers are sent area property owners seven signs are posted on september 16th and a legal ad was published in polk sun on september 18th this is another in a series of cases we have where we're reconciling the use of these parks the county parks with the appropriate land use designation this case we're going from residential median to recreation open space which makes the boat ramp and facilities outside more conforming that'll save for questions any questions uh staff and this is a staff initiated yes sir okay at this point i'm going to open it up to the public is there anyone in the audience i'd like to speak for or against this case see none close the public portion bring it back to the board for discussion and or motion mr chair i move to approve ldc pas 2024-22 second motion a second roll call please renee heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brooke ignini for the motion mike kickman for the motion moral bishop and mike schmidt for the motion mr chair passes 6-0 thank you next case please next case is another small scale conference plan amendment ldcpas 2024-23 lake cannon park comp plan amendment and ian nance will present the case all right again this is the county initiated small scale comprehensive plan amendment to change the future land use designation from residential low to recreation open space at lake cannon park facility is located at 1508 less lake cannon drive north of northwest avenue j south of state road 544 south and west of winter haven in section 24 township 28 range 25. on september 13th 108 mailers were sent to area property owners three signs were posted on september 16th an illegal ad was published in polk sun on september 18th with no response once more we have uses on site that are non-conforming or at least not totally conforming with the residential low land use designation and this will change it to recreation open space and i'll stand for questions any questions of staff and this is a county initiated yes sir okay at this point i'm going to open it up to the public is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this case seeing none close the public portion bringing back the board for discussion and or motion mr chair i move to approve ldcpas 2024-23 second motion and second roll call please bernie heath for the motion david adult nine for the motion mike hickman for the motion brooke ignini moral bishop and mike schmidt for the motion mr chair passes 6-0 okay thank you next case please next small scale conference plan amendment ldcpas 2024-24 lake rosalie park is your next case ian nance will present the case all right last one of these this is a county initiated small scale comprehensive plan amendment to change the future land use designation from agricultural residential rural to leisure recreation at the lake rosalie park this is located at 2925 rosalie lake road east of shore drive north of state road 60 and east of lake wales and section 35 township 29 range 29 on september 13th 12 mailers were sent area property owners one sign was posted on september 16th and a legal ad was published in polk sun on september 18th with no response lake rosalie has an rv park and boat ramp and neither well the rv park's not consistent with the arr designation changing it to leisure recreation and we'll make it conforming with that i'll thank you and stand for questions any questions the applicant or staff i'm sorry and this is a staff initiated okay at this time i'm going to open up the public portion is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this case see none close the public portion bring it back to the board for discussion and or motion mr chair i move to approve ldcpas 2024-24 second motion and second roll call please renee heath for the motion david dalt nine for the motion mike hickman for the motion brooke ignini moral bishop and mike schmidt for the motion mr chair it passes 60. okay great thank you next case please good morning the next three cases your last three cases will be read into the record by robert bolton and i these are the green leaf cases items number 12 13 and 14. the first two cases or robert will read in or go ahead and present on the map amendment which is ldc pal 2024-5 it's 526 acres of a map amendment from development of regional impact x and tourist commercial x to residential o x residential medium x and neighborhood activity center x and then i will present a few slides before robert starts but then i'll present text amendments to the conference of plan and land development code the conference of plan text amendment ldc pal 2024-6 it involves multiple policies but overall it's to remove some references to greenleaf being a resort community that's not the situation now remove some requirements for planned developments add policies regarding a modified land use neighborhood activity center modifying dear the development of regional impact land use classification for greenleaf as well as tourist commercial center and as well as limiting the development totals to 1700s single family multi and single family units 246 multi-family units and 6 000 square feet of non-residential which is reduced from what's currently vested and we'll go into that in a little bit as well as additional golf course and other recreational amenities the land development code text amendment ld ct 2024-10 that is to again remove the resort reference to greenleaf limit to the limit the development as was stated for the conference of plan add neighborhood activity center to the use table as well as some other uses and rows to the use table and requirements for traffic studies parking requirements buffers and recreational uses for the record the items submitted includes staff reports ordinances application by the applicant impact assessment statement utility information and demonstration of need and for the notice the conference of plan map amendment includes all three notices mailers posting the property and newspaper ad the text amendments just require the newspaper ad but i'll read all of them into the record because we referenced both cases in those advertisements 845 mailers were sent on september 13th 22 boards were posted on september 13th a legal ad published in the polk sun on september 18th 15 emails in support and one phone call in support and two emails in opposition so i have a about three three slides that i'd like to just briefly go over just for context and then mr bolton will start his presentation on the land use map amendment some of you may or may not remember some of you weren't here specifically for the text amendment to the comp plan that we did for smoky groves which is the part on the very bottom of green leaf but what you see in red in the location map is the outline of what we call the green leaf utility enclave area you can see it touches the city of haynes city and in the aerial photograph on the right that in red is what's subject to the conference of plan map amendment today but the text amendments will incorporate all of the utility enclave area green leaf was originally adopted in 1973 as the arrowhead development of regional impact and it was adopted by a plan development for about 19 over 1900 units clubhouses conference center which the building for the conference center is still today still there today but not used golf courses and a variety of amenity centers amenities recreational amenities in 2008 the comprehensive plan and land development code were amended to create the green leaf utility enclave area because the golf course and the convention center and lots of other parcels were in process of being purchased by a developer and they came in and made it some amendments and at that time the board of county commissioners entered into an agreement called an essentially built out agreement that said what's on the ground which is in the table the top table on the screen is there it's vested and anything new that comes in after that doesn't have to fall into the dri threshold unless they went to that point which they never did and what was vested at that point for new development you see at the bottom of the screen which is over 1700 units 120 multi-family hotel and convention center and really what's being removed with this amendment these amendments today are really removing the hotel rooms and the convention center just to give you a little bit more context again what you see outlined in yellow is the original dri boundary but what became the utility enclave area is what's outlined in blue and what's outlined in red just giving you a little perspective of the difference between what you heard earlier this year so with that i'll turn it over to mr bolton for the conference plan amendment thank you good morning again robert bolton with land development uh this is the presenting the ldc pal 2024-5 apologize i've got a typo here the comprehensive uh plan map amendment on approximately 526 acres within the greenleaf uea what does keyboard keeps moving all over the place um like shonda said this in red is the land that is uh the subject of the map amendment it is intermixed within the existing developed uh detached single family attached single family and condominiums this land includes the existing convention center the old tennis facility and the former golf courses i would also like to mention uh we'll probably i'll be pointing out several different typos that we have located that may or may not be within the staff reports that y'all received one of them that i may not touch on real closely but i want to mention right now is on page 12 which refers to school concurrency in there it stated that there could be a potential of 849 students generated by this request the calculation should be read 638. these are views of lake marion road and kokomo road which are two of the main roads within that area lake marion cuts through the center of the greenleaf development these are the two land use maps the existing and the proposed land use the existing as a result of what china had talked about earlier along with a pd modification back in 2009 which put this tccx on the eastern side of greenleaf along with the western side of lake marion road with the current standards in our code all the intensity and density that is allowed for development would be going into that red area the tccx this crosshatch dri area is limited to recreation effectively the now dormant golf courses the proposed future land use will turn almost all of that into residential low then a couple of areas of residential medium and a neighborhood activity center at the intersection of kokomo and lake marion road a couple of interesting points currently as it stands there's out of the 526 acres under consideration today approximately 180 acres of that is tccx that's third about 34 percent of the land land use we've got under consideration that's where right now effectively all commercial and residential development would go clustered in those areas with the amendment that we're that's on the for discussion that intensities the commercial intensities are going to pretty much go away except for transference of the 60 000 square feet of commercial space that will go from this red area basically to keep 60 000 square feet at the end at this area up here where the nac is so we lose a lot of the commercial intensity and going to place it with a lower density residential with the new with with what is being proposed approximately 91 percent of that land area is residential low about seven percent is residential medium with about 12 percent uh being in a excuse me two percent being nac before i go into what we're where we're going this is a little bit of where we've been again this is come comes from exhibits from pd 73-19m which was approved by the board in 2009 this is expired so don't i don't want you to think that this is what they could go and build immediately but this was sort of the intent of what is currently on plate on uh with the land uses that we have right now these are exhibits from that this is the current convention center which is currently in a rather dilapidated state this is all of that uh resort housing along uh within the nac western side of kokomo eastern side of the resort everything would just be clustered very very tight within there this at this time it made sense it was a resort the golf courses were still very active that has since changed over the past 16-ish years that's one reason why the applicant is in with this land use request on the left is a very clear land use map showing the different the three different districts the residential low the residential medium and the nac the actually i want to go back one slide uh because we don't i don't think i have this and i don't really know the answer to this but back when these were put in place the western side of kokomo the condo areas received residential medium all of these residential low over here are the condo units also i don't know the answer to why they did not get residential medium but as we go through this realize that the eastern side of kokomo these are all condos except for a small strip right here of detached single so placement of the residential medium over here i'm gonna start on the western side of kokomo abuts the condos and fronts the urban collector kokomo this fronts uh lake marion road an urban collector along with the condominium units this parcel in here is surrounded by the condominium units it shows very much the compatibility the nac is up here at the intersection of two uh collector roads ms bennett will get into a little bit more about the uh location of this nac and the approvals for that in a the nac that we have out there again that's where the sixty thousand square feet of vested commercial retail is going the rest of these abut detached single or attached single family housing what's going to go in the plan to be able to keep everything straight out here and ensure the compatibility is what is being referred to as a village plan on the right with all the different colors each one of those villages have a specific maximum density and specific lot widths between 50 and 60 feet so they're not going to have to come in for pd but they are being held within the code to meeting our current development standards and specific lot widths this is an overlay of these uh densities up against on the area aerial so you can have a good idea of how this does really fit compatibility wise this pardon me this is the country homes uh portion it's a it's a gated section of green leaf they will have intertwined with them densities between three three and a half over on this four this area some four and four dwelling units an acre over on the western side you can see where each one of these areas four units three units each one of these specifically also have uh this is going to be a 60 foot wide limit area this will be a mix of 50 and 60s each one of these have specific uh maximum densities as well as lot widths they will still also have to meet all the current land use regulations including our recently adopted garage setbacks open space setbacks internal sidewalks if they do decide to try and do on on uh street parking they'll have all of those to meet if they should try want to deviate from those that could push them into a pd some of the concerns within green leaf that have been heard as the wastewater capacity what is there also there is a statement currently in uh 2.130 e 1.1 the development of regional impact the dri x the dri designation remains on the majority of the golf course due to the impacts on water and sewer once the existing water and wastewater plant has been expanded and has the permitted and plant capacities to handle additional development then the applicant may change may request to change the land use for those portions of the designated dri with this change in the tcc they have the vest these the vested rights this is table four out of your out of the staff report this is another area where i want to mention you may or may not have this bottom number and one version of the staff reported had a 500 000 type number that is an was an addition error the correct number is three nine nine zero nine zero all of the vested rights up here for resort residential the multi-family workforce housing hotel rooms commercial retail the existing civic center or convention center and the expansion of 50 000 square feet effectively go away we are they are transferring the 60 000 commercial into the nac by what they have vested we calculate 552 670 use of wastewater with the request and the 246 multi-family townhouse duplex type 1275 single family and 60 000 square feet comes to a total of 399 000 90 gallon gallons per day they have fully permitted plans approved by florida department of florida department environmental protection fdep of 680 000 gallons they have provided documentation that the current usage rate averages 120 000 gallons a day notice i said 1275 that is what is within this land use smoky groves has to be included in this that's 245 units that calculates to the 114 750 less the this request of the 399 399 090 gives a calculated available surplus of 46 160 this is the analysis we're looking and saying because they're we're doing away with the tccx and the rights that the vested rights that they have there that we can that the uh request to go to residential low medium and nac on the drx areas is compatible with the comprehensive plan traffic traffic is another uh the item that has been brought up in this area again the same type of analysis i'm not going to get into the all the nitty-gritty of it but it's the same vested rights versus what we've got coming in significant reductions both in add trips and pm peak hours both of them indicate a just over a uh 33 33 34 percent reduction in trips at maximum build out so there is a um a saving of trips plus we've got the you know in the future the uh eastern polk parkway that is in current planning stages with florida department transportation as well as a number of other roads that are in planning stages uh some funded some are still in significant planning stages but not funded and prior to any level two this will be part of one of the text amendments that um a major traffic study will be prepared and performed in accordance with the methodology to be developed in conjunction with polk county and the polk transportation planning organization to analyze all future development and identified improvements on impact impacted links subsequent major traffic studies shall be shall incorporate previous development uh as required per appendix c of the ldc impacts of the comprehensive plan map amendment and related ldc comp plan amendments to local infrastructure and local infrastructure in schools is less than the current land use development impacts allowed by the current ldc section 402 f allows at full build build out the ua the uae's utility provider has permitted capacity to meet the calculated development requirements of this request the subject property located within the greenleaf uea with the related land development code text amendment and comprehensive plan is considered to be consistent and compatible with the ldc and comprehensive plan staff recommends approval at this time i'll turn it over to miss bennett for her to present the text amendments good morning again shonda bennett with the linn development division we've got a slide here describing the sections of the amendments to the comprehensive plan the introduction for the greenleaf uea in the comprehensive plan talks about greenleaf being a resort we're having to remove those references also revising limitations for the new development that i described earlier replacing the old vested development with what's proposed in terms of the maximum development limitations that you see highlighted here in the bold black and red developments and this uh these amounts um you can see how basically removes the hotel rooms and the total 160 000 square feet for the commercial convention center reduces that to 60 there's a removal of the requirement for the plan development and you'll see in the land development code text where there's an option for a plan development if they can't meet those standards that are listed there uh this third row describes more removal of tourist vacation resort residential amending the development of regional impact policy that mr bolton just read and the amendment there i'll describe in uh in a slide or two modify add a modified neighborhood activity center policy so that we can locate a neighborhood activity center at the intersection of kokomo and 544 and 544 and then restate the purpose of the tourist commercial center but allow the remnant sections of the tourist commercial center so if you look on the right hand side there's a parcel that's going to remain tourist commercial center it's developed for condos and an office for that but the applicant doesn't own that piece so that's going to remain tcc and then you can see some tcc at the very northeast corner we didn't want to remove their rights that they currently have with tcc so we needed to modify the tcc just to describe that and removing a reference to a pepud that's a pre-existing planned in development it's the master plan communities that existed prior to the adoption of the our zoning code prior to the 1970s so bringing this text amendment forward and these land use changes forward can bring this more into the modern times of what our planned development requirements are and not needing to use the vesting of the pp ppud uh in the ordinance uh this i needed to offer a change in terms of the neighborhood activity center policy uh three sentences really make up this uh neighborhood activity center policy describing the purpose of it which is to allow for neighborhood shopping needs second sentence is the policies proposed is modified as compared to what the neighbor activity center is in the future land use element and that's just relevant in terms of making sure developers understand the difference between those two nec policies and then due to the vesting of the 60 000 square foot retail it's meant to go in that neighborhood activity center so it's just establishing that uh neighborhood activity center allowing it to be developed and again we're modifying the the floor error ratio policy for a tourist commercial center to state that the 60 000 the tcc designation can be in addition to the 60 000 square feet of retail so that these two tcc sections can be modified according to what the floor ratio and setbacks etc are for tourist commercial center there is a gas station in this tcc on the north side of 544 it's got a grill and a bar as well so it may wish to expand someday so we don't want to limit their expansion based on that 60 000 square feet and the amendment to the development regional impact policy that robert brought up is seen here on this bottom screen offering that it's remained the majority of the golf course however if the cpa is approved by the board of county commissioners it's going to be instead of dri rl however there are remnant parcel of the dri still left and that's what's circled in red that was original to the dri back in the 70s and even in 2008 when these land uses were first approved that parcel was intended to stay as dri the applicant doesn't own that parcel that parcel has a very narrow front edge on kokomo road not even enough to meet our look our road frontage widths but so it's not an intersection it's not conducive for commercial necessarily but we needed to acknowledge that and allow it some rights if they did decide to move come forward with any kind of residential development and if they want to do something different than that certainly we discussed that with them and and work with them on that the land development code text changes uh robert also already showed you this map this map is going into the proposed text changes for the comp for the land development code along with the table that describes the lot widths lot sizes road i'm sorry lot widths lot sizes densities and unit types be they um single-family detached or attached or townhomes the introduction section is being amended just like uh described for the conference plan amendment uh we're removing the plan development requirement of the comp out of the land development code there's a use table in the greenleaf uea just like there is in table in chapter two we're going to have to add neighborhood activity center to that modify the dri category so we can allow the single family residential for that remnant dri piece and make some other adjustments one of them being multi-family the land development code text limits multi-family to townhomes and single family attached so you won't see a large apartment building there so instead of making that a level three review we're going to make that a level two i've mentioned the village map that you see on the right on that third row so moving on we also have some language in the land development code regarding short-term rental so when the conference plan was adopted in 2008 all the existing units maintained their rights for short-term rental but that's not consistent with how we treat new subdivisions with short-term rental status so we had to ensure that anything new that comes along has to abide by what any other subdivision would if they were going to do short-term rental which is a level three review and if any of the villages comes in and needs to vary from the table that's in the code that you see on the left here if they're going to vary from that that's what they would have to do plan development for it and that requirement means they have to meet the location the new location score that was adopted by the board in january i know this is somewhat dry information but lastly we're adding the requirement for major traffic study that i'll go over briefly i went we went over that we have some buffer requirements that we're adding into the code that incorporate existing vegetation because they're it's fully it's got it's fully grown you're not starting over from scratch they're the wastewater plant that's on site we wanted to encourage its ability to get stronger and and have necessary improvements but if they go off that parcel that will require level three recreation and open space and requirements very similar what's required for a plan development that they'll have to do outright without going through plan development and then we've got some parking requirements that are not waiverable our normally our parking requirements are waiverable but since they're being added in this particular section chapter four they won't be waiverable and that was requested by the applicant i skipped over a few slides robert went over those already with the transportation improvements and all the other sections of the new sections of the code that have been added that the applicant will have to abide by i wanted to briefly go through the components of the traffic study um it's not only for you all but for the people um in the room so many of you know that uh if you're of a certain intensity or density you reach a certain threshold you have to do a major traffic study the traffic engineer meets with our transportation planning organization and we talk about what that math methodology looks like what links what intersections they have to analyze and language is being added to require that with the first level two for a major traffic study for everything it's somewhat what's the snapshot of what it looks like today versus how it might look five to ten years down the road and that leads to subsequent level two subsequent level twos may have to do a major traffic study or they may just have to do a minor traffic study so for the ones that have to do a minor traffic study the code does allow the transportation planning organization to add links into that minor traffic evaluation if necessary so the idea is with the minor traffic studies have some kind of evaluation of what the previous developments that have already been built what's that impact cumulative with the new development and evaluation of the directly accessed segments and any additional segments where the major traffic study indicated the future development displayed in that figure that you saw is significant and significant has a special definition in the land development code and significant means project traffic that is five percent or more of the capacity of the link and so for anyone that doesn't have the details of a major traffic study just off the top of their head you come in and the engineer does a distribution analysis so so much percentage of the trips come off on the access links and those percentages goes down as the traffic goes further away from the project and those percentages indicate are they significant meaning are they taking up a lot of capacity of that road or just a little bit of the capacity of that road and then that leads to whether improvements need to be made or if they're going to fail that link so those kind of um that information is is important as this project builds out it's not going to build out in a year it's going to build out over five to ten years so we need to understand that cumulative traffic and the cumulative impact especially for proportionate share requirements and proportionate laws that we have nowadays and then there'll be somewhat another requirement for a methodology review for the minor traffic studies that doesn't have to be complicated it could be emails exchanges it doesn't have to be any kind of significant meetings but it can be if the applicants wish that last slide so uh for justification for approval for all of it the the comprehensive plan text and land development code changes really go hand in hand with the map amendments so we need the text amendments to really help with the justification approval of the map amendments we're limiting the development the commercial square footage being at the neighborhood activity center the village map and associated table that limits the lot width sizes etc the new standards for buffers open space parking standards are added traffic study requirements amending the dri and tcc policies adding the neighborhood activity center policies and as robert stated you're taking a grouping what was clustered development in the tcc you're reducing it and then spreading it out so those are the basis for our recommendation of approval and we'll stand for any questions could you start over right i know i know mr chair quick question for staff here regarding the the traffic studies just to make sure i'm clear on it we'll have one big traffic study basically for the whole uea and then essentially after that for every village that comes online if it passes the five percent threshold it will be required to have another traffic study is that correct um not necessarily just because it passes the five percent you're right in your first statement about a major traffic study but say the next level two just is say 50 lots it's a minor traffic review okay um however maybe it's come after several different villages that have a large impact and there's some some analysis that needs to be done of an intersection improvement so the idea is that this language gives us the right to say well we need to look at a couple of intersections or a couple of links and the justification for this or the rationale for this is in 2008 there wasn't anywhere near the development that it is exists today and there's a lot more traffic on the surrounding roadways so paying a lot more attention to those impacts is relevant okay that's clear thank you any other questions of staff i do i appreciate your detail appreciate your detail um the devil's in the details obviously but uh eventually it comes down to a bottom line and i read through almost all of that and i didn't see this i was looking for the answer to this question um what is the existing occupancy or the existing number of units in this in this area right now compose uh compared to what they're proposing to add what's the existing what's the new total going to be when you say occupancy do you mean units that have people living in them now or just units period units period well so in 2008 when the dri was um declared essentially built out that's the board of county commissioners entered into an agreement with the state and the developer at the time to say we're done at that time there were 1035 units um owner and rental condominiums and townhomes single-family houses equated to 324 with a 54-hole golf course at that time so with this amendment well i should say before i say that the new development to occur after that after those units i just read is at the bottom of the screen which was over 1700 units of resort residential multi-family 120 hotel rooms of 300 so it's this mix that you see at the bottom of the screen that's being altered and you saw from robert's presentation that the equation of the water sewer and transportation actually goes down with the new the new proposal so at one time they were approved to build 1 753 units that was a maximum number that the dri allowed them to build the no uh yes your first question but the maximum number of units the dri allowed them to build i'm turning i'm talking about residential units was night 1935 but when okay the 2008 amendment okay so if you added what was existing the over the the 1000 and then 1700 that would have equated more okay more than what the dri would have allowed them but but it was um but what you see at the bottom of the screen gave them that vested right so that's what we're comparing to would they be vested for today what you see at the bottom of the screen okay still don't understand the the numbers what is there now i mean we have golf course that we're that we're turning into into residential units um we're saving uh nine holes of the golf course i'm trying to see what what's there now right now compared to where we're going with this what's there now is the top table seven i don't i can't imagine it's changed okay over the last 20 years but it may have slightly but i can't see it said i we didn't go out and count okay 1359 that was 20 years and we're going to go 1700 single 246 multi for a total of 1946 that's the proposal right yeah and that includes the units in smoky groves too that does include those yes sir okay yes how many is that how many units that's a good question 240 no that was over 400 that was over 400. 23 sorry 25 in that point okay i understand we're pulling a lot of load because of the hotel units and a lot of load is being relieved but i'm still trying to figure what we're ultimately adding um i think i understand that i think i'm sure mr allen will okay review it again okay any other questions of staff i figured staff would be the ones we should ask okay uh mr allen thank you mr chair uh good morning commissioners for the record bart allen i'm a land use attorney with peterson and myers law firm my address is 225 east lemon street lakeland florida i am here on behalf of the applicant uh greenleaf resort redevelopment redevelopment llc as well as nc real estate projects llc uh on behalf of those two entities i have mr scott house who's the manager of those entities he's here with me this morning um we'll dive into all those questions uh there's there was a lot of discussion uh staff did a great job going through take actually probably did a better job than i did on trying to put together a powerpoint presentation to really take what is um fairly complicated issues and distill it down into this kind of a format i i can tell you that i struggled with it um and um my presentation is probably twice as long as theirs but i'm going to move through it real quick it was because i'm not because i correct because i'm not going to i'm not going to duplicate too much but um there is a lot of important history to talk about this is an exciting case the greenleaf area has a long-standing history in polk county going back to 1971 really i found out that that was kind of one of the original pd approvals there was one of the staff reports from 1973 actually referenced a 1971 pd and saying that it was the first pd approved in polk county under the zoning code and it may not have been done entirely properly from what i what i read in 1971 but it's a but it's a it's a long time coming um there's a lot of history here at greenleaf we've all heard the stories of billy jean king playing out there the the williams sisters you know taking tennis lessons out there arnold palmer being involved in the golf course so seeing an opportunity to revitalize this area and bring some new investment into this area i believe is a really good thing and i commend mr house for uh taking this on because this isn't it's not an easy thing to do these kinds of projects these are some of the hardest kinds of projects but they're significant and they're meaningful and we have an opportunity today to take that and move this and move this forward and create something that will be long lasting um and to that uh a lot of what come out came out of this and i haven't even gotten into my presentation yet but i just want to i want to make sure you know we heard oh well there was a typo here and there were some changes here a lot of that was because this was a very fluid and developing project between smoky groves as well as communications with the residents mr house and his team mr kovacs i haven't i haven't gotten introducing our team yet but danny and and scott spent a lot of time working with the community they had anywhere between 10 and 15 community meetings whether that was individual hoas full at least five full community meetings where they just said hey everybody come in we want to talk about our project those meetings were occurring up until monday and there have been a lot of give and take and back and forth so what you've seen here and this the compilation of all of this is not just you know oftentimes it's us planners and lawyers and engineers getting in a room and saying what can we do on a piece of property this has been a very interactive prop project with the community we have i know we still have some detractors i that you know you're never going to get a hundred percent of people but we got a lot of supporters here today too and um so i'm really excited about that so this is a this is a good project i'm going to dive into some of this stuff and uh commissioner schmidt hopefully i can hopefully i can show what you were talking about on the unit counts um but before i get into that the other rest of our team uh track engineering danny kovacs a professional engineer has been involved in this uh bentech llc keith burge he is our utility operator he runs and is overseas the water and sewer treatment plants he's here he's provided an analysis we which you know oftentimes engineering numbers and utility numbers vary a little bit our our numbers may be a little bit different than what uh staff's numbers show but either way you cut it through staff's numbers or our numbers we have the ability to serve we have permitted capacity and utility plants to serve the existing 1359 units that's what's on the that's the residential unit count on the ground today as well as what we're proposing um uh to to move around which is the 1700 units um and he's here to answer any technical questions if we need to i also have from traffic planning design mr j daval he's a transportation engineer a lot of conversation about transportation studies and major traffic major traffic states we've already done that it we've already completed a major traffic study we've already gone through the um methodology process with uh pulp tpo we've established that um and and right now we have capacity on all the roads there are some access improvements right you know just for you know getting in and out of proposed projects of course and those are identified in there it hasn't been submitted we're we're not at the level two process yet but we do have that um and that we did not see any uh significant issues as it relates to traffic concurrency or capacity or impacts intersections or segments um and i have a copy of that that i can make available in a few minutes so that's our team we're all here i'm going to run through a few slides try to talk through a few things but this this was our agenda this is the old uh clubhouse and convention center building back back in the day but we're going to talk a little bit about the history how we got to where it was in 2008 what's currently approved what we're asking to change and then how that will actually look in the future i've already gone through that so see i'm moving real quick um this is the original one of the original master plans from the pud it was approved in 1973 as pud 7319 it was over 1800 acres almost 2000 units plus golf convention amenities different things i have i spent probably more time in the history of this stuff than i should have but as looking through the looking through the actual impact assessment statements that was that were filled out in 1973 they were intending to develop at around three and a half dwelling units an acre on average with some of the condos being a little bit higher but you know mix of units on average they were looking at around three and a half dwelling units that would be exclusive of the golf course so you know you wouldn't be counting the golf course in in that density calculation and as i also walk through my presentation the boundaries of what was green leaf has changed over time i mean you saw it in staff's report it has been almost 1800 acres almost 1900 acres it's been as small as you know 900 acres you'll see some flux in the the acreage i've got all those numbers in there and they're all different but i want us to the reason why i'm doing that is so that we can show that from an intensity perspective what we're asking for as staff has pointed out is really a reduction in intensity from what's currently approved today but it's also consistent with what's out there today what's actually built so from a density perspective it is very comparable densities which is why you see a lot of residential low on our map right we're we're looking for very consistent development in 2000 so between 1973 and i'll start at 2004 there was development that was occurring out there there were things happening at greenleaf it was a vibrant community we you know we've already talked about some of the things that were going on out there i believe there were pga tour championships a whole lot of a lot of really cool stuff going on at greenleaf the the numbers of modifications to the pud the numbers of site plans and different things if you go back and look on the files it was just too much to try to encapsulate but in 2004 something happened in polk county and really the state of florida there were three hurricanes you had francis charlie and gene you also had ivan that hit alabama which is where i was in 2004 but you know that doesn't impact you guys here um uh that those set of hurricanes really did a lot of damage to this area greenleaf was severely damaged the convention center the clubhouse the golf courses were pretty much put into a state of disrepair and a lot of those exciting activities really started slowing down if not ceasing all together in 2008 the property was for sale there was a couple of different groups that were interested in the piece property they had it they brought in what is you know this was where the uea was established and on the left here that's just the old one of the old map pages just to kind of show kind of the boundaries and different things just not really relevant in 2008 they established via ordinance the future land use map that we've seen but they also established the um uea and then the uea became this boundary so this is what the green leaf uea is this is the purple they also entered into the built-out agreement and that built-out agreement that miss bennett touched on was this was a signed agreement between polk county the department of community affairs at the time which is now florida department of commerce something or other uh and uh the property owners and the future developers and they what they did is they recognized what had what had occurred over time and said you you developer have essentially built out your dri you've met that the dri has met all of its obligations for all infrastructure roads improvements so we consider you built out we consider the built the dri over any future development does not have to go through dri process anymore they also said we're going to recognize and approve your your new request which was the additional units the additional development that's where the 1753 120 multi-family workforce housing this is the this is what was originally approved but this is where they recognize all that existing or that new development okay so during the built-out agreement we said okay 1359 units on 971 acres and if i take out the golf course i'm at around 2.83 dwelling units per acre existing that was what was that's where i was in 2000 in 2008 and that table is directly out of the polk county conference plan it's also in this built-out agreement so that is that is that is where we started from they then approved a number of units additional development within the tcc which you can see along kokomo road on the west side of kokomo road and mr bolton did a good job of explaining all of that as well as the tcc along lake marion and some other little kind of pockets of different things that's where the new development was going to go that is this that is the 1753 so they were going to put that type of unit unit count in there i almost had the concept site plan from the from that old application uh mr bolton or uh mr bolton has been and i forget who's uh it was a application showed it to you so i didn't need to but it was condos it was four and five stories six story condos as well as townhomes and apartments single family so it was a really intense development within those areas um not to mention the additional the additional convention center hotel room a 300 bed hotel room if you would have added all that together and developed that that would have been 3232 units on 760 acres which which now your your your density has gone from look you know the high twos to four but that's you know spread out that is inclusive of what we now refer to as smoky groves so that's why it's even a little bit lower um so what are we doing this is this is a this is a picture of the same building that we looked at earlier this is kind of showing that it's become a little dilapidated over the years um and what what we're changing is intended to come in and revitalize these areas and you can see that there's this it needs some love um probably more than more than anything so we're asking to change the map the comp plan and the lane development code the combination of all three of those requests effectively builds a plan development within your codes and ordinances and maps which is why we're asking for the pd requirement to be taken off because when you look at how we've structured this we're meeting all the pd requirements that you have today it's just codified which will be probably the first one of these kinds of projects and probably my last uh in polk county because it is it has been as staff will tell you it has been a lot of work and i really appreciate what shonda and and and robert have have done to get us here so what are we doing map changes boiling it down to our simplest term there's about 525 acres within the boundary of what we're changing we're taking 170 acres of tourist commercial center and 355 acres of that dri x land use and converting it to 478 acres of residential low 36 acres of residential medium and about 11 acres of neighborhood activity center that's that's the simplest math of the request from a map change what does that look like i've had to turn the map on its side to make so apologize north is up and i hope you have a good chiropractor to see how this works the tcc is here it's also here i'm not sure why it's not showing up on this map probably an operator error from a cut and paste which was me um but it it should be along this area right in here and then this basically this orange hatch is is going to uh be changed those are the areas that are being changed and you can see right now today that the balance the existing stuff the majority of it is rl1 the existing development in there is majority rl1 what we're proposing is to go to the rl the 478 acres of rl which is spread out and throughout the basically the existing golf course as well as the existing tcc that we discussed earlier 36 acres of residential medium which is essentially this here this here and this here up on coke on lake marion road and 11 acres of nac and the nac is sized intentionally to accommodate the 60 000 square feet of commercial uses but it's also to bring you know maybe a small grocer or some restaurants office uh you know personal service type uses to this area so that people don't have to travel as far uh to to uh even for the existing residents so when you look at the combination really the the existing rm here the the hatch the the blue different hatches um are what we're changing the darker colors are rm this is rm adjacent to rm along kokomo road you've got some existing rm up here with rl all around it rl all around it existing rm with rl all intertwined in here and then the only other uh pocket of rm is again up here on late marion road as well as here internally and as as staff already pointed out the existing development within here are condominiums and so there it's more consistent than you would necessarily just think by thinking rl against rl but what does this do so it creates future land use and entitlements and all these pieces of property establishes the densities through the lane development code of up to the 1700 single family units that we talked about and um and the 246 multi-family which are again limited to townhomes and limited to paired villas or duplexes single family attached no three-story garden style wanted to go there we were going coming back for additional approvals that's in the comp plan so it wouldn't just be a pd in my opinion we'd be having to come back to you to amend the comp plan text again so codifying all of this really locks in what this property can be developed for in go back in this scenario mr bull was talking about the policy about permitted capacity having to be proven and all of that sort of stuff before you developed into the drix under the existing condition the way i apply that is we can develop those 1753 units that are approved today 120 workforce within the tcc that's already approved once that's done that basically maxes out the the plants the water and sewer plants so before we could go in and develop the golf course we would have to go get additional permitted capacities from the water management districts and then we could come back in and apply for land use changes within the golf course areas this request is effectively going to preclude that from ever happening so it's going to not just spread out the intensity throughout the entire site is putting the cap on it because there's not going to be any additional you know the land is going to be effectively developed at that point the only potential would be if the the nine hole golf course that we're revitalizing were to ever try to reconvert and that's certainly not in the plans of this day and in that instance we'd have to show our permitted capacity was approved by both water management district and dep and then we would have to come in with a comp plan amendment a map amendment text amendments and all of those sorts of things again to ever redevelop in the future so my point is is is by implementing it this way we are providing a lot of certainty and a lot of protection and that this is how it's going to function moving forward so and i and i think that is a welcome um thing i'm not going to dive into the weeds of this comprehensive plan text amendments miss bennett went through a lot of those but it is effectively to revise the development matrix to go from what's on the left this is what's currently approved 1753 120 over to the proposed which would be 1700 units of single family detached and those are arranged from 50 foot lots all the way up to half acre estate lots so you've got a mix of lot sizes in there and at the end of the day if you take what was originally approved the 1359 and you add our development program into it you get 3305 units the entire uea is approximately 1250 acres the nine hole golf course is going to be about 70 acres based on some of the survey data i have that puts us at an overall density at 2.8 the reason why that's relevant is if you went back to what the 1359 was in the original uh exhibit we're right there we're we're spot on with what the density that is currently allowed so i think that's another critical point and to um uh be relevant again all those density numbers i have not included the golf course to try to low lower the number or anything like that so just to be so that's why those acreage numbers change all over the place creating uh the other things that we do is we're creating a commercial center this is a rendering of the entrance of kokomo and lake marion road and you can see uh we've got you on this side we've got some office buildings you'll see in the background and i have a better exhibit later on with the pickleball courts and some of the amenities but this is the commercial center that we're trying to locate here on the west side of kokomo again bringing in those daily services some additional cleanup of the of the uh comprehensive plan text land development code text amendments right in line to complement the comp plan text amendments this is a aerial rendering which i think is pretty uh effective to to show kind of how the new uh development will intermingle and and mesh with the existing development within greenleaf and you can see the golf course being re-established agree with what staff has said this basically implements the plan development requirements for this project in the comp plan and land development code it also removes what's currently allowed which are 35 foot lots as small as 2 400 square feet um i mean those are some pretty small out i mean outside of a townhome you don't really get get much smaller to that and those are what are allowed referenced and have typical lots in the comp plan and land development code language today all that's coming out so 50 foot lots are our smallest lot 25 foot garage setbacks all of those standards are now implemented on this on this property and um to ensure uh compliance and quality development the village approach is new um we we walk through that this will be part of the comp plan but again this what this does is it prevents us from going over the what we've said we were going to do from a density perspective a lot of this how how these densities came out were from all the conversations with the residents uh i will tell you that this is not where we started um the unit count was much higher at one point there were some townhomes and other places and through conversations with the residents conversations with staff things changed and um and this is i'm not certainly not suggesting that all the residents are supportive of this but we we have a lot of support the gray on this site plan here is just to show where the golf course type in amenity areas are so that it's so that it doesn't get assigned residential development and at the end of the day if you bake all this together comp plan map amendments and land development co-text this is generally what will what will shake out this is the site plan at the end of the day and the site plan um uh will go through level twos and you can see the different different components paired villas here along the along this side there's 38 of those um 28 estate lots on the other side of lake bear this is lake marion road running south so estate lots half acre lots on that side and that's codified in in these tables some townhomes up here this is where the 208 townhomes are commercial and then variety of different single families throughout so again looking at the future we how does this how does this work meet your pd standards it reduces impacts on infrastructure and it brings a tremendous amount a new development investment into the area and i'm going to walk through a handful of those we prepared a really brief eligibility score based on your current pd requirements i'm not going to go through that but this would have qualified for 30 points which would have allowed six and a half dwelling units an acre but we're not in a tsda so that would allow the rl to go all the way up to five um so you could have potentially get scored well enough to go to the higher end and we're asking for something much substantially less you've seen the analysis on the um ability to serve and the reduction in infrastructure this is what was requested this was part of the applications in 2008 again we're asking for less what we're impacting is less than what was asked for in 2008 so we have the ability to serve just a couple excerpts of the utility analysis from bentech transportation reducing the average daily trips from what's currently entitled by 6 500 daily trips 800 pm peak hour trips that's without smoky groves if i include the smoky groves and those 425 units i'm still reducing by three three over 3 000 daily trips and almost 400 pm peak hour trips with this development mix um investment in new amenities we talked a little bit about that but this is the amenity plan or a site plan that kind of starts highlighting the amenities re-establishing the arna palmer golf course on the nine holes is in the works pickleballs tennis courts dog parks pools cabanas walking trails with fitness activities along the fitness trails are all interconnected with sidewalks and the cart paths so a lot of interconnectivity you can't see the interconnectivity because of the scale of the map but if i had a big d-sized sheet you could see the blue and the red what's being proposed is over 25 acres of amenities that is exclusive of the golf course based on the units we're requesting at again the seven 1700 plus the um multi-family 1946 we would be required at 500 square feet a unit under the pd requirements to provide 14 and a half acres and we're providing 25 acres worth of amenities so we're greatly exceeding your pd requirements and that does not include the golf course acreage so we're really providing almost 100 acres worth of amenity with the with the golf course these amenities will be for the residents of the proposed development but they'll also be available should other members of the existing community want to participate now there will likely be a fee with that just like there's a fee for the existing residents as part of their hoa stuff but they will be made available if other if existing residents want to want to utilize them these are some really nice renderings this is the golf course and clubhouse that's being re-established and you can see in the background this is some proposed development just kind of show you how we're how we will all start kind of piecing together pickleball courts dog parks walking trails with exercise equipment this is all based off of that site plan how they would look based off the site plan that we've currently put together splash pads and playgrounds and the star if we wanted to go back and kind of point out where this was located on the site plan the star references back to where where they were located on the site plan so with that we agree with staff's conclusions i know that the ordinance maybe didn't get fixed so we would like to ask that the ordinance if this were to be approved to be to state that there's 1700 single-family detached right now the ordinance at least as of yesterday said 1275 and that 1275 was again as i said we had a lot of moving parts on this so this this is nobody's casting any stones here that's 1275 is less smoky groves and because smoky groves is in the uea it needs to be included so that number needs to be 1700 because it is not developed it's got entitlements and it's actually got an approved level two but it is not quote developed so we'd like to see that change in the table uh 2.130 e1b of the comp plan text as well as sections 402f and fb of the land development code text those are three places where 12 the number 1275 is specifically listed we need that to be changed to 1700 and staff is aware of that and i believe that they are supportive of that certainly they have an opportunity and we support the nac language that ms bennett showed um during her presentation that is uh that we we support that as well so with those three changes uh four changes depending on how you want to count it um we would request a favorable vote we know we got some people to speak so i'm going to sit down if you have any questions i'm here my team's here let us know but this is a good project it is an exciting project it's going to bring some really needed investment into the area it is a less intense program overall than what is currently approved in the comp plan part of the part of the the law today it implements the pd requirements it's been a product of a lot of back and forth with staff it's been a product of a lot of back and forth with the community i think this is a good project you've got recommendation of approval a finding of consistency and compatibility with and compliance with three lane development code with that i'll stand for any questions and request a few minutes at the end of public comment any questions the applicant okay thank you at this time i'm going to open the public portion before we get started i want to make sure everybody that's going to speak here this afternoon has been sworn in if if not then i need you to stand up raise your right hand and be sworn in your job but i'm sorry uh okay good at this time i'm going to open the public portion is there anyone in the audience that would like to come up and speak for or against this case if there's if there's a number of people that need to do that please if you could line up in the in the in between the two sides of the uh the chairs there so for the sake of time everybody can go right one right after the other and also please remember number one there's a three minute time limit number two please don't be redundant if you if you talk everybody's talking about the same thing i think you all don't need to hear it twice as well as we thank you i'll go ahead name and address for the record good afternoon my name is dennis lazinsky 18 robin lane hayne city florida i'm coming here today as the president of the greenleaf country homes development hoa incorporated i'm here today to support this plan it's been a rather tenuous 11 to 12 months from the time that it started we heard about it we all live on the west golf course which has been vacant now for 25 years so we kind of got used to having open space behind us the initial reaction from a lot of our residents was that they just don't want this to happen but as a result of the meetings you just heard about between residents mr house and his staff he's made some very expensive and considerable concessions to our community some of these concessions actually improved the security as now we are a gated community but we're going to be intertwined with all these homes so he's going to put in a concrete buffer the six foot buffer he's actually moved some of his planned homes because some of our residents only had five or six feet from his new lot line so he's actually made some pretty major changes to his original plans they've changed a lot we had he had townhouses planned initially two-story uh that blocked some views of our existing neighbors uh he's changed that plan i believe that was quite costly so essentially he's he's made some great changes for us we appreciate them and we're looking forward to see this work get done thank you thank you good morning my name is robert lewis i live at sixth greenwood lane haynes city i'm here this morning to express my continued support for the improvements proposed for the green leaf community today's proposed text amendment is what is best for the current and future residents of green leaf we understand we are not here asking for permission to build as that right has already been given we are simply asking that the plan on the books today be amended to better suit our community we have no interest in more short-term rental properties multi-family units hotels or another convention center green leaf is much better suited to be a residential community with new infrastructure and amenities for its residents this amendment would reduce future construction the density and by association the extra traffic that will come along with it scott house and his team have been great to work with and have allowed us to have a voice they've listened to our concerns asked for our input and ideas and have implemented many into the plan before you today new investment and ideas are what this community needed and what it has lacked for nearly three decades we ask for a yes vote on today's amendment and thank you for your time and patience thank you this is katherine tidwell my husband and char my husband charlie and i live at 21 aspen drive in greenleaf uh quickly i do support the two previous speakers i think they had quite a lot of microphone down just a little bit there you go thank you so i support the two previous speakers i think they had a lot of good things to say i also support the amendment to remove the previously proposed hotel rooms vacation tours commercial centers etc leaving greenleaf as a residential with our residential amenities so i am asking that you approve the changes from the existing land use proposal development plan to the proposed land use and development plan we're anxious to begin the revitalization of greenleaf so again we do ask for your approval your yes vote thank you very much thank you next please okay that's the one you're looking for thank you very much um my name is kevin freeze i'm the hoa for south bay landing i'm the hoa president i'm a 29 almost 30 year veteran of the united states air force i've been in multiple wars uh came here about four years ago and uh bought a piece of property since then uh polk county has grown quite a bit in particular um greenleaf has uh uh gone through transitions through this four-year time and in particular i want to focus on an area that's associated with uh south bay landing and if we look at the map it's kind of the dullish green on the bottom it would be your right uh this this area excuse me left this way oh oh yeah this yes oh okay yeah so in particular that's uh butted up against uh our uh area um that is across the street um from lake marion uh in uh the road uh which is adjacent to uh greenleaf uh in particular that is a highly highly vegetated area um and it has not been touched for probably many many years in particular my concern is a dual fold uh one they're going to put uh that's probably about uh four acres of land um and it's honor ironically tied to across the street so if you look at the map it'll show about 12 17 acres however that little strip of land is only total of about four acres uh highly vegetated so in particular uh my concern is the amount of uh housing that's going to go in there there's only six houses that are butted against that total lawn and they're going to put 28 duplexes against single family homes against there i only have 14 houses in my total hoa area and then we're going to put 28 24-ish duplexes in that strip of land in particular that land has not been touched i know this for a fact because i i live against that land and it's highly vegetated and there's a lot of animals in there part of my request today is in particular is to meet uh part of the uh the plan is to look at the um how pope county uh coordinate with the florida fish and wildlife uh in that land um because i do know that there's uh gopher turtles uh owls bats uh we have i have um um um eagles that land back there uh panthers bobcats small plot of land but that land is highly highly vegetated i'm just asking for the commission board to look at looking at that and having the florida wildlife come and do an evaluation to make sure that that piece of property that is not is protected and okay so forth thank you all right thanks and thank you for your service thank you hi my name is judy torres and i live at 251 blue heron boulevard in haynes city i've been a long-term resident for um in greenleaf and for personal reasons um just to one year and 10 months ago my husband and i moved and being a realtor and that is not my goal is to promote this beautification of greenleaf just because of my background but yet i was persecuted for that in a in a meeting a while ago because you no longer live here any longer well because of everything that is going to happen to greenleaf mainly and of all of scott house's generous changes that he's making to basically make sure that the residents of greenleaf are happy i am proud to say that i just put in an offer to buy another home in greenleaf and i'm moving back in mainly because of everything that is going to happen to greenleaf should you guys accept the proposal and so i'm here to say please do so just because now i'm moving back thanks anyone else my esteemed panel i'm don fosick i'm with uh 116 arrowhead arrowhead lane and uh i come to you guys today you know i moved in in 16 right and uh i knew exactly how far i was from any amenities believe me it's an investment the house is an investment and uh i don't i don't think i need the the amenities that's the first thing the second thing to this is is uh is density especially when you get on the west course if you look those houses that are over there are either from half acre to one acre lots and what they're proposing is is three to an acre that's a big change this is not across the street down the block half a mile either way this is right here i can see it you know they say we're going to build a concrete wall well this is in a neighborhood that exists uh the next thing is is we talk about the water and and when you get to talking about infrastructure we got to boil water two weeks ago because you know this thing was probably put in in the 70s and nobody's talked about putting in new pipes and plumbing i know mr house has talked about putting in new meters and this that and the other but he really hasn't got down to where we got to put some more infrastructure in this thing and while we're talking about infrastructure i know you guys have read the papers and you have seen what dundee has done dundee is at its max on water i mean we had a proposal this morning that we're talking about going down there and doing basically desalination of water orlando said the same thing they're talking about building a pipeline down cocoa and re-putting in that that power plant because it's extremely expensive if this happens yeah i think it i think uh john bode told me it was fifteen thousand dollars to hook to thousand dollars a month for a water bill that's serious who in the heck can uh can can afford a thousand dollar a month water bill we got people starving now i listen to christian radio constantly and one of the big things they've been talking about is buying socks for homeless people because it's growing why do we have to add to that the next thing is is when you talk about a traffic study i did a traffic study this morning because i was 14 deep getting out at highway 17 off kokomo road that's not a joke that's a factor and i'll tell you another thing that's a factor is when that new housing project opens up in lake hamilton which nobody's talking about when that thing opens up it's going to be big you're not getting out of here you know we just had major hurricanes come through and ravage the southeastern united states and if we all had to evacuate right now where will we be probably in our cars i don't know if anybody knows what happens to people when you run out of water but all laws seem to go second hand because you have to have it i i would appreciate a no vote and i really do appreciate your time i know it's a tough decision i mean i i don't think i want to have your your jobs thank you thank you anyone else hello my name is theresa souls i live at 9365 west lake marion road i have lived in the lake marion area since the 1970s i saw greenleaf in its early days when it was a thriving beautiful destination resort i worked there as a team babysitting for families that came to stay at the resort the property has been neglected over the years by past owners and i will admit it is in desperate need of rehabilitation i am not against that however just as what was approved several years ago the density that is now being proposed for this project will forever ruin the rural character of our area which is the main reason families like ours moved out here the peace and tranquility will be that we have enjoyed will be lost forever and with all the new homes comes more traffic between the three roads going west on towards 27 and alternate 27 there is a traffic light at 544 and alternate 27 and only stop signs at the end of kokomo and hatching hall roads and at alternate 27 we have dozens of dump trucks going to and from the sand mine on 544 that use these roads daily and tend to slow the flow of traffic not to mention cause damage to the pavement surface take a trip out there and see for yourself don't just rely on a traffic study and according to the recent pto report 71 of roads included in their analysis are currently at a level of service c assuming and assuming there is no improvements and as traffic continues to grow level of service will continue to decline imagine the gridlock that will result once an additional 1700 homes are built and occupied if no improvements are made and as a taxpayer and resident i find that unacceptable very little has been mentioned about the schools you're estimating 638 new students from this development and in speaking with a public school teacher who is whose opinion is very trustworthy with more families coming to the area you need to realize there is already a teacher shortage classrooms are full and more and more students are coming in with diverse language and learning needs that are increasingly harder and harder to meet considering the teacher vacancies so if you have kids or grandkids in the public schools keep that in mind as you continue to approve these residential projects i appreciate your time and hope you'll contribute to a solution and not be part of the problems mentioned today thank you yes sir glenn law horn 11 000 jim edwards road haynes city this thing was brought up back in 2008 i think mr bishop was even here then i don't know if he remembers okay so in 2008 this was all a very contentious hearing we de novoed several times and it went back and forth and then they finally decided to come up with that pd 73 73 i think it's 73 14 and they they passed it and that's where it sat for 17 years now and if i heard it right today it's expired somebody said it was expired john to say yes okay so here's the point all this property all around greenleaf all this whole area all the way out into here cross hatch nahal road all the way almost to lake wales except for stuff that has been gone in and land use changed lately that's all rural property this whole piece all the way back into haynes city has all been rural property as long as i've lived here and i've been here 61 years almost and you're going to take this piece of property which was a golf and tennis resort and you're going to try to turn it into an urban enclave it's going to be urban houses from me to the sheriff you know that that close together that that's just crazy nobody out here wants that these are five acre home sites all out through here there's a few i'll give you that there's a few in here that are three quarter acre lots but for the most part we live on five acre lots or larger um so that's what i'm going to tell you about the the ruralness of our area and you go put all this out there you're going to cause a major traffic snarl you got two lane roads two of them that come to that area when you get out there that's all you got there's only two roads all the way to highway 27 two two lane roads so um the water and sewer is not available we're talking about earlier today i spoke to you about the prwc that's a very real thing and that's a very bad idea that water is going to be bad and it's going to be extremely expensive wow i'm running out of time um so when you get down to it that's a pd you're going to do a text amendment to do a pd change is that right doesn't that kind of go around the whole premise of going through the process the right way if you're going to do a land use change of this size that needs to be a pd not just to scribble some words on a piece of paper and call it good is that how this works we'll let the staff address that okay well anyway i appreciate your time my time's up for anyone else in the audience would like to come up speak for or against this case paulo lavona uh 131 arrowhead lane i live in arrowhead lakes estates right across from green leaf uh just just here kind of listening to everything that's going on the dri how 1900 homes were approved then it was down to 1753 but nobody's like talking about the original like the intent like at first this was a resort community so these homes would have been four units or you know dual if it's an apartment or a condo now we're switching them into homes so the space isn't going to be the same you're going from a rural area to a very congested area not only that uh traffic reports i know everybody keeps bringing up the traffic reports thing are they considering what's happening on lake hechanea all the new communities there the beginning of kokomo i mean they cleared out it's got to be at least a thousand homes going down there and then now we're bringing another 500 up here plus whatever they're trying to do in the golf courses like there's a lot of traffic problems coming to the area i mean i take my daughter to school every morning from my house to hang city high takes me about 25 minutes and it's only with no traffic it's like for five minute drive like these are very real problems this is at 6 30 in the morning this is again at 7 30 when i take my other daughter to school like no one's talking about the traffic like it is an issue we need to be aware of these things thank you thank you yes ma'am pardon me you haven't been sworn in come on up to the podium just raise your right hand and answer the following question do you swear and affirm that the evidence and testimony you'll give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you um i'm lauren brown and i just moved into um aspenwood 18 aspen drive please pull that microphone down just a little sorry um 18 aspen drive and i have to tell you when i fell i came down from massachusetts fell in love with it and i love it there's building all around you can go down 27 doesn't matter where you go we need to stick with the issue what we're talking about we're talking about green leaf this is our community what has been proposed i think is absolutely amazing we don't want a hotel we don't want any of that we want the wording changed we want us to be a community for also us to enjoy and not have to deal with any of that there's going to be traffic there's going to be traffic lights there's going to let's leave that to the civil engineers you know let's stick to us and take care of our own that's all i have to say okay thank you my name is ed there i live at 511 maple leaf court they're talking about traffic last night i came home this gentleman talked about the other day last night i came home about 7 30 and i went across 17 by the post office and drove all the way to green leaf and i passed two cars i go golfing in the morning at seven o'clock in the morning and i go to different golf courses and i have never had a problem getting on to kokomo road or 544 there yes there's traffic there's traffic everywhere but there isn't that much traffic that you're backed up for 10 cars or anything like that green leaf isn't that hard to get out of how many accidents do you have happening on that highway by our intersections not very many i hope you vote yes for this and thank you thank you anyone else in the audience like to speak for or against this case seeing none i'm going to close the public portion ask the applicant to come up and address some some of the issues that were brought up uh thank you mr chair um appreciate everybody's uh participation this is an important process and you know this is part of the part of part of um what makes projects good a couple things i want to point out uh mr freeze i believe was his name uh referring to the piece of property on the east side of 544 um i'm just going to use mr bolton's i'll tell him what this one's that one's perfect um this area here village three the piece that's on the east side here those are in the lane development code provisions that are part of what were before you today those are minimum half acre lots that's a 14 acre parcel um so that is slated for approximately 28 units on that side so there's no duplexes there's none of those kinds of things on that east side of that road that is in the in the lane development code to be half acre lot minimums um we will be doing one of his other comments related to birds and tortoises and you know protected species generally right we have to do all of those reviews as part of level two every development does we will we will have all of the environmental surveys sand skinks eagles we're not aware of any eagles in this area nesting on this area they certainly are in the general vicinity no nests on our on the green leaf property all of the protected species will be addressed at level two we'll go through all of those all of those reviews we have done a traffic study we've already worked with staff to do a major traffic study that encompasses the entirety of what we're what is before you today there are no segment negative segment impacts there's no major intersection improvements there will be improvements required for purposes of accessing the site and accessing the project turn lanes things of that nature but that is that would occur um in any development so nothing extraordinary there um looking uh like this one this this this picture will do i heard uh kind of some conflicting testimony i heard some people say that we're out here in the middle of nowhere and that everybody's five acre lots and then i heard people say that there's a lot of development going on in the area and that they're concerned about it so i'm not real sure what's what what is what was the the discrepancy is there i do know that as you move down 544 the city of haynes city's city limits are on our western boundary and a piece of our northern boundary already so the city of haynes city is immediately adjacent to us those are the municipal municipal boundary i also know that a majority of this area here i don't want to say all of it because i don't i'm not down to parcels has been changed to industrial so you're seeing industrial move east along 544. the reason i know about that that was a project i did in the city of haynes city and that is now an industrial site you have a landfill here almost 300 acre cnd landfill here and the balance of this area out here is slated for uh or planned and wanted to be industrial or in uh business park with the city of haynes city as part of their city view sap and then then as you move forward i think i might agree if if we were over in this area asking for what we're doing i would i would certainly be understanding of being a little bit dissociated but that's not the case what we're asking to do is we are asking to within greenleaf within an area that since 1971 has been slated for residential development and again as i pointed out at that in 1973 they were talking about three and a half dwelling units an acre on average that they were wanting to develop within the greenleaf footprint that was in 1973 to what's currently there which excluding golf course is about 2.8 dwelling units an acre and taking that intense commercial tourist activity that is currently planned to be constructed all along lake berrien road lake kokomo road and taking a less intense development footprint and instead of putting it in those tight space that tight space spreading it out and that as we discussed earlier does two things it reduces the impacts on infrastructure it also prevents future additional growth on top of what's currently vested and entitled within the polk county conference of plan a built-out agreement with the department of community affairs in polk county and the property owner as well as as development standards and the land development code for this area that would allow 35 foot lots uh and and small you know 2 400 square foot homes what we're proposing as you've heard today is substantially different from that and you've heard a lot of you've heard a lot of testimony from people that live in the community that are supporting this project that want this project to be approved um we certainly believe this this is a good project um we would request a favorable vote uh just two other things traffic i think i may have mentioned traffic already we have done a traffic study we've addressed that your staff report and you've got mr mclemore here he obviously can speak on behalf of the school board shows that there are capacity today now we have not that's not binding on us we have not gotten to the point of binding but there is capacity in the school system today and that's in your staff report those are your experts that that have reviewed that there is capacity in the schools to accommodate the new new project um with that you've got a staff recommendation of approval for all three requests and i believe um miss bennett from it in an order of operations we'd like to vote on comp plan text lane development code text and then future land use map amendment so still to sit number six number ten and then number five um as i'm if i'm off the top of my head right on my numbers uh we would like them approved in that order or voted on in that order i would request a favorable vote maybe i'm being too optimistic uh and with that we'll stand for any questions i hope i've covered everything that came up from the residents if i missed anything i'm i'm happy to cover it any questions to the applicant josh mr chair i just want to be clarified uh on the data analysis that's included in the staff report regarding schools that capacity information relates to the current enrollment those figures do not include the vested seats for developments that have already been approved within that area that analysis will be done at level two when this development actually goes to uh for through the county to assess uh improved engineer designs but that's when we actually start looking at what all the vested uh student stations look like across that area now i will say that with the school districts adopted five-year cip plan we do have additional schools coming online in the northeast but until we actually get refined site plans it's all about a timing issue uh i'm sure i know you're familiar with uh some of the new recent developments that are in the northeast we've actually had they've had to enter into mitigation agreements because there is not existing capacity today however florida state law does allow developers to enter into mitigation agreements is voluntary but that is an avenue that the state has allowed developers to seek and it is a mutual agreement that is established and agreed upon by both parties so i just need to clarify that okay thank you one other thing uh yeah i remembered i forgot to talk about uh there was some discussion about utilities in the prwc and and and water this property owner this area has its own water utility system that is not connected to is not a part of the county's water system it is a private utility system it is not a member of the prwc is not participating in the prwc it is already permitted and has capacity to serve existing residents as well as this proposed uh development so the utility bills if if that gentleman's testimony was anything was was correct won't be uh impacting the these the existing residents within this area or any future residents so might be worth considering uh moving out there yeah so the water and sewer capacity is only going to be enough to serve that development correct since it's a private system that's correct it is effective i mean there will be some surplus yeah but certainly not anything where you're going to be coming in and expanding okay thank you anything else at this time i'm going to bring it back to the board for discussion and or motion yes sir um it's kind of our job up here to look out for all the people of polk county not just people here today but i'm not real thrilled about 1946 new units i don't think anybody in that area up there that are but he may have his own water system but it's still pulling water from the aquifer like everybody else so but that's not the issue um i commend the owner on his compromising um and his development team for making this as best they can work for everybody involved and at 2.8 units per acre we don't hardly ever see that up here that is really low as far as a density and i believe like i said i'm not real wild about 1946 new units but that's about as good as i think we could hope for me speaking for me and myself and my vote okay anybody else okay before when we take a motion for each each case we got to vote on those individually and the first one would be ldcpl 2024-6 correct chonda so do i have a motion uh yes mr chair i'll make a motion to approve ldcpl 2024-6 do i have a second i'll second and does that include the change that needs to be made to the table yeah there's not an ordinance on the ordinances on the last two cases but we can just make a note of that uh i thought it was a text as that one okay for the ldc okay yes well then i make that motion with the note of mr allen's uh requested changes to correct the the unit count in certain locations of the ordinance to 1700 okay okay motion signal the active the text changes to the land use designations neighborhood activity center tourist commercial okay that's presented okay yes that's presented okay you got roll call please renee heath motion david dalton i'm for the motion brooke ignini moral bishop and mike schmidt or the motion mr chair passes 5-0 okay thank you next next one uh mr chair i'll move to approve ldct 2024-10 as presented second and a motion in a second renee heath for the motion uh david dalton i'm for the motion brooke ignini moral bishop and mike schmidt or the motion mr chair passes 5-0 just for purposes of clarification as presented include it refers to the 1700 units correct that was part of the yes as presented i just want to make sure okay maybe moral might make this last one because i'll probably make it clear all right so exactly i don't think i think the this one is clean right it is all right i move that we approve um 24-18-39 ldc ldct 2024-10 for approval uh no it's i think it's dash five oh i'm sorry dash five i was looking at the wrong one dash five got a motion do i have a second second roll call please renee heath for the motion david dalton i'm for the motion brooke ignini moral bishop and mike schmidt or the motion mr chair passes 5-0 okay there you go at this you're still the chairman of the chairman that's for you so you're stuck and we have to do vice chair and vice and secretary yes i'll make a motion that david dalton for vice chair second okay i got a motion a second for for david dalton being the vice chair all in favor say aye aye aye opposed motion carries okay anyone want to be secretary i mean i don't want to touch that one maybe maybe mr bishop would you like to be okay with all right i would like to make a motion to uh uh to make mr merle bishop our next secretary i got a motion to say for merle bishop be secretary for next year's planning commission meeting all in favor say aye aye aye opposed motion carries motion to adjourn so moved see you later all right i can do this one more time there you go