officer for the special exceptions and variances to be heard this afternoon. If you intend to speak, please sign up on the list in the back table. We need your name and address. We'd like you, if possible, to speak clearly and slowly, A, because I'm old and I need the help, and B, because it makes a better record. Everything for today's hearing is recorded. It is being recorded in the building, or the door over there. And so if you're in disagreement with the decision that I make, you can always appeal it. The decisions will, I will write the decision after this hearing. It won't be issued today. It'll be issued between normally seven and ten days. And what's going to happen is we're going to have two types of, two types of evidence. The county is going to present their recommendation and view, and the applicant or the applicant's representative will be able to present their view. Once the two presentations are made, the hearing will be closed to the public, and there'll be discussion, and I'll make a final decision after this hearing. So, I've spoken with no one. The county has spoken with no one today. So, the last thing I'm going to say is if you need an interpreter, please let us know, and we'll either ask you to get an interpreter or find one for you. You have to be telling the truth and under oath to testify at a public hearing. So, Madam Clerk, we'll please swear everyone in. If you're going to address the land use hearing officer on any case today, please stand and raise your right hand and answer out loud to the following question. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you provide today is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Thank you. Ready to proceed? Our first old business is a continued case, just in case anyone is in the audience, for LDSE 2026-4. That's the Limedale special exception. That case has been continued. It has exceeded the advertising date. So, when it comes up for hearing again, it will be re-advertised, reposted. That's LDLSE 2026-4. Our first case today is LDLSE 2026-8. Waldo Roca is requesting a special exception to park a commercial vehicle, a 2011 Mac and trailer at his residence on approximately 1.46 acres within a residential neighborhood, a residential low land use district. The property is located at 3414 West Sokrum Loop, east of Kathleen Road, north of Winchester Estates Circle, south of Old Dade City Road, northwest of the city of Lakeland, in Section 4, Township 27, Range 23. On September 9th, 21 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on September 9th. And a legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on September 9th. So far, we've received no response from the public. Aaliyah Ngleema is the case planner. Good afternoon, Aaliyah Ngleema with Land Development, presenting LDLSE 2026-8, the Roca Special Exception. The applicant is requesting a special exception to park a commercial vehicle, which is a 2011 Mac and a trailer at their residence on approximately 1.46 acres within a residential neighborhood. The subject site is located at 3414 West Sokrum Loop Road, east of Kathleen Road, north of Winchester Estates Circle, south of Old Dade City Road, and northwest of the city of Lakeland, in Section 4, Township 27, Range 23. The property is located within the residential low one future land use district and is in the urban growth area. The applicant was cited by code enforcement for parking a vehicle at this location. The owner is seeking approval for parking the commercial vehicle on their property. According to the site plan, the parking area will be on the south side of the existing home. The vehicle will be parked a minimum of 20 feet from all property lines. And here are photos of the 2011 Mac and trailer. The 1.46 acre property is sufficient to accommodate a vehicle such as this while meeting the standards required in Section 216. Very little of the vehicle will be visible from off-site. And a commercial driveway apron is required to protect West Sokrum Loop Road from the stretching caused by such a heavy vehicle's turning movements on and off the property. The nearest arterial road is US-98, less than three miles to the east. The view of the commercial vehicle parking area from the neighboring properties will be required to provide proper screening and buffering through a Type B landscape buffer. Or a fence with a minimum height of six feet may be used in lieu of or in conjunction with the buffer. So staff recommends approval based on the site plan provided by the applicant and recent visits to the site. The proposed placement of the vehicle will be at the rear of the primary structure and shall meet the screening and buffering requirements. Staff finds this request will not have a negative impact upon the health, safety, welfare of adjacent properties if maintained and screened in accordance with the site plan. And I'll stand for any questions. I only have one question. Are there any concerns about the sound of the truck coming in and out of the near a residential property? No, ma'am. And the buffering will help with that as well. And Mr. Rocha is aware that the truck must be empty at all times, that it's on the property? I think it's a condition of approval, but we can also let him know. On page 2 of 14, parking of a commercial vehicle in the operator's lot shall be limited to empty weight only. No load or cargo. Thank you. I have no further questions. Is anyone here to speak, the applicant or a representative? No one's here. Mr. Rocha? Please come up and do the microphone. And does Mr. Rocha have a translator? No? Yes. Okay. Thank you. I thought it was the elderly person behind you. Thank you. Hi. Can you state your name and address? Yes. Are you in agreement with all the requirements that were just stated by the land planner? Yes. And you've agreed to put the commercial driveway in and the buffering in. I have nothing further. Does anyone in the audience have anything to say about this? That being said, I'll close the public hearing and take this. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. Sorry. Yeah. Nothing wrong. I live next door to Mr. Rocha. I have a conditional use permit for my business, and I fabricate metal things, and I make a lot more noise than he ever does, and no one's ever complained in 29 years. Okay. And he's not a problem. The only problem is the intersection itself with all the open muffler vehicles, the Harleys and the trucks and the sport bikes and tuner cars, and everybody seems to have to wind their engines out to the max all day and into the night. Okay. He idles in and out once in a while. That's wonderful. Can you state your name and address? Pardon? Can you state your name and address, sir? Richard Scurillo, 3340 West Sokrum Loop Road. Thank you. Thank you so much for coming and for your insight and input into this request. Yeah. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wants to speak either in favor of or opposition to this exception? Hearing none, I'll close the public hearing. And we'll go forward with the next one. Our next case is LDL VAR 2026-37. Corey Brinson is requesting a 2,400-square-foot accessory structure to be larger than the primary structure in a residential low-3 and preservation land use district on approximately 1.5 acres. The subject property is located at 2018 Meadowoak Circle, north of Pace Road, south of Interstate 4, east of the Polk Parkway, west of Berkeley Road, east of the City of Lakeland, in Section 8, Township 27, range 25. On September 9th, 22 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on September 9th, and a legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on September 9th. We've received one letter in opposition. Kyle Rogas is the case planner. Good afternoon. Kyle Rogas with Land Development, presenting LDL VAR 2026-37, the Meadowoak Variants. The applicant is requesting a 2,400-square-foot accessory structure to be larger than the primary structure, and a residential low-3 and preservation land use districts on approximately 1.50 acres. The subject site is located at 2018 Meadowoak Circle, north of Pace Road, south of Interstate 4, east of Polk Parkway, west of Berkeley Road, east of the City of Lakeland, in Section 08, Township 27, range 25. The property is located in the residential low-3 and preservation land use districts, and is approximately 1.50 acres. While the total acreage of the site exceeds the residential low-3 minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet, roughly 59% of the site is designated preservation. The preservation consists of wetlands and flood, which limits development of the uplands area under the RL-3 district. The applicant purchased the property in July of 2016. According to the property appraisers' website, the home was built in 2016 at 1,736 square feet under building permit DLDH 353500. The proposed accessory structure will be 2,400 square feet, which is approximately 138% larger than the primary structure. Recent aerial imagery from Google Earth Pro indicates that multiple properties within the immediate vicinity contain accessory structures, most notably the property located at the corner of Meadow Oak Circle, Parcel ID 252708-298375-000340. The property received approval under case number LDLVAR 2024-47 for an accessory structure exceeding the size of the principal residence. The approved structure was for a 2,000-square-foot, 40-by-50 detached metal garage intended for the storage of recreational vehicles and household items. Principal dwellings on the site measures approximately 912 feet, making the accessory structure approximately 219% larger than the primary residence, and it is this property here in reference. The requested variance is believed to be the minimal variance necessary to optimize the use of the owner's land. If the subject site was 2 acres, the applicant would be allowed to construct an accessory structure 2,604 square feet, which is 204 feet larger than it was being currently proposed today. The accessory structure will meet all setbacks for the RL3 land use district and other applicable setbacks, such as the 25-foot undisturbed wetland buffer pursuant to Section 620. The accessory structure will be 175 feet from Meadow Oak Circle, a county-maintained local roadway, and 5 feet from the east property line. The county frequently receives variance applications requesting accessory structures that exceed the size of the principal residence. These requests come as a need for storage for recreational vehicles like RVs, boats, or property maintenance equipment. The amendment to the LDC allows residents to safely store their vehicles or equipment within structures. This provides protection from the weather and reduces visual clutter, keeping the integrity of the neighborhood. Staff recommends approval. The accessory structure will meet all the setbacks in the RL3 land use district and other applicable setbacks. Although the applicant's request for a 2,400-square-foot detached garage storage building would make it the largest accessory structure in the subdivision, it would not be the largest overall structure. Several double-wide mobile homes and mobile homes with additions in the neighborhood exceed the square footage. And with that, I will stand for questions. I just have a couple. Mr. Rokas, did you contact the lady who wrote in in opposition to this? I did not have direct contact with her. No, I was received the email through our planner on call file. Did you read the letter she sent, Ms. Wacker sent in? Yes, I did read the letter. And what is your impression of her concerns? The concerns regarding the wetlands, they are being out of that preservation. That's where those majority of those wetlands and floodplains reside in. They are going to be set back by the site plan about 90 feet from that designation boundary line from preservation to RL3 with an additional depth of, I believe it's, you know, substantially almost like 500 feet from that rear property line. So they're adequately meeting the required setbacks for not only the, you know, the rear yard setback, but also the 25 feet for that wetland and flood protection zone. Okay. And with that, I have no further questions. Is Corey Brinson here? And anyone else who wants to speak on your behalf? I do. I'm his wife. Wife? Wife is okay. Wife is okay. Could you state your name and your address, both of you, please? Corey Brinson, 2018 Meadowoak Circle, Folk City, Florida, 33868. Tiffany Pierce, same address. Okay. Do you have anything to say in response to Mr. Rogus's assessment? So, I mean. Are you in favor? Obviously, you're the applicant. You're in favor of it. Yes. Do you have any problems with the sanctions he's put forth and why he put them forth? Are any of your neighbors here or upset or in favor of it? No? Not that I know of, no. Okay. Do you have anything you want to tell me? We did have the people that determine where the wetlands are come out just to be sure, and that's how we determined how far it was. Okay. So, we do have that airport if it's needed. Okay. No, that's okay. He's covered everything. Okay. Okay. Seeing no one else will, is there anyone else who wants to speak? To my knowledge, no. Okay. At this point, I'm going to close the public hearing, and thank you for coming, and it will be a week to 10 days before there's an order. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Our next case is LDL VAR 2026-38. Arthur Qualey is requesting a variance to reduce the accessory side setback from five feet to two feet, and the accessory rear setback from five feet to two feet for a shed on 0.18 acres in a residential low district. The property is located at 8157 Oakhurst Boulevard, west of Chase Road, north of Ritter Road, south of Banana Road, north of the City of Lakeland, in Section 11, Township 27, Range 23. On September 9th, 40 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on September 9th. A legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on September 9th. We have received no response from the public. Aaliyah Ngleema is the case planner. Good afternoon. Aaliyah Ngleema with Lane Development presenting LDL VAR 2026-38, the Oakhurst Boulevard variance. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the accessory side setback from five feet to two feet, and the accessory rear setback from five feet to two feet for a shed. So the subject site is located at 8157 Oakhurst Boulevard, west of Chase Road, north of Ritter Road, south of Banana Road, and north of the City of Lakeland, in Section 11, Township 27, Range 23. The site is approximately 0.18 acres, located within the Residential Low 1 Future Landage District, and in the Urban Growth Area, and is part of PD 02-03. The applicant's rear yard contains a pool with a screen enclosure surrounded by a six-foot opaque fence. Structures behind the fence are mostly shielded from off-site view. So the applicant received Board of Adjustment approval in 2015 to reduce the side setback requirement from five feet to two feet from the rear and side setbacks. The reason for this variance is the need for a larger shed. The new shed will utilize the same two-foot to property line they received from the original shed. The hardship is due to the location of the pool and the screen enclosure, which does not provide adequate space required to install the requested accessory structure. So part of the shed will be within the rear drainage easement, which was reviewed by the county engineer, and has placed a condition on the site. Staff observed multiple other sheds in this community that encroach into the setback. So whether granting the variance will be in accordance with the general intent and purpose of this code, and that the variance will not be in interest to the area involved, otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, is an opaque fence surrounds the property side and rear boundaries. Staff observed multiple other sheds in this community that encroach into the setback. The applicant received Board of Adjustment approval in 2015, and the reason for this variance is the need for a larger shed. The new shed will utilize the same two-foot to property line variance they received from the original shed. And the county engineer has reviewed the shed being in the drainage easement and has placed a condition on the site. And I'll stand for any questions. So there is, I guess my only question is, there is a shed now, but it's too small? Correct. Yeah, the applicant wants a bigger shed. It's the larger shed. This request is, it's going to be in the same exact spot. Okay. And there is a fence behind this house? Yes. I have nothing. Could Mr. Qualley come forward, please? Arthur Qualley, 8157 Oakhurst Boulevard, Lakeland, Florida, 33810. Is there anything that wasn't said by the land planner that you would like to tell the court? No, ma'am. She's got everything. Okay. Thank you for coming. Thank you. Thank you for requesting this. Thank you. Anyone else either for or against this variance? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and move to the next case. Our next case is LDLVAR2026-43. Michael Keith Harmon, on behalf of Ray Lyman and Deborah Erdman, is requesting a variance to reduce the right-of-way setback from 15 feet to one feet for an attached carport on 0.39 acres in a residential low three district. On September 9th, 31 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on September 9th. And a legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on September 9th. We've received no response from the public. Leah and Gleema is the case planner. Good afternoon. Leah and Gleema with Land Development presenting LDLVAR2026-43, the McAnopee Drive variance. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the right-of-way setback from 15 feet to one foot for an attached carport. The subject site is located at 927 McAnopee Drive, west of Carter Road, north of Christina Boulevard, south of County Road 548, and south of the city of Lake Lennon, Section 19, Township 29, Range 24. The site is approximately 0.39 acres, located within a residential low three future land use district, and in the transit supportive development area. So the house was built in 1994, and the applicant purchased a home in 2007. So the applicant's garage is too small for the two vehicles. The carport will be approximately 19 by 27, and be used to cover vehicles from outside weather. The house is only 20 feet from the right-of-way. Section 208-F2 allows carports to go down to six feet administratively. However, that would not cover the entire vehicle on the driveway. Approval of this variance will allow for efficient use of the applicant's property. So the property has physical limitations, such as the shape of the parcel, along with the 20-foot drainage easement taking up a portion of the site. So special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land structure or building involved, as the property has physical limitations of the site, such as the shape of the parcel and the 20-foot drainage easement, and the home being built close to the roadway. And the physical limitations of the property dictate the placement of the carport. And I'll stand for any questions. I have no questions. I'm assuming since you've recommended approval that someone from transportation has been contacted, or there's no danger in putting the carport this close to the roadway? Transportation was not contacted, but this roadway is a local roadway, so there's not a lot of traffic. But also, this house is on the end of a cul-de-sac, so again, it won't be a lot of traffic going on this roadway. Thank you. I have nothing further. Roads and drainage. Mainly, we're concerned about the drainage easement that goes on the west side of the property. Is Mr. Harmon here, or Deborah Erdman? Come on up, please. Good afternoon. Alan Davidson, our Harmon Services, we're the contractor with the Erdmans. Deborah Erdman, 927, Micanope Drive, Lakeland, Florida, 33813. Homeowner. Ray Lyman, homeowner. Okay. Do you have anything additional you'd like to say in addition to what the land planner has said? She pretty much covered all the bases. I would just like to say we'll still be over 15 feet from the actual edge of pavement, and we're not going to have any issues with any of the utilities there. And this is on the edge on a cul-de-sac, correct? Correct. Correct. Yes, ma'am. Okay. I have nothing further. Is there anyone here either in opposition to or in favor of this variance? Hearing no one stand up, I will close this court hearing, and we'll proceed to the next one. Thank you so much for coming. Thank you. Are you ready? Our next case is LDL VAR 2026-46. Lance Williamson is requesting a variance to allow an accessory storage structure larger in size than the principal structure on a 0.79-acre residential property. That's residential suburban. The subject property is located at 2422 Gibsonia Galloway Road on the south side of Gib Galloway Road, east of Hidden Lake Road, and north of the city of Lakeland in Section 22, Township 27, Range 23. On September 9th, 24 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property, and a legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on September 9th as well. So far, we've had no response. Tyler Daniels is the case planner. Good afternoon. Tyler Daniels, Land Development, LDL VAR 2026-46, the Williamson Variance at 2422 Gibsonia Galloway Road in Lakeland. The applicant is requesting a variance to build a detached storage accessory building larger than the primary structure. The property is on the south side of Gibsonia Galloway Road, east of Hidden Lake Road, northwest of Lakeland, between the Kathleen and Galloway areas. The site is in a large area of residential suburban with other surrounding residential designations. The site falls on the corner of Gibsonia Galloway Road and Hidden Lake Road. The house is 2,862 square feet and sits just under an acre. Here's a site plan featuring the proposed carport and building, avoiding the floodplain to the southwest and adhering to the required setbacks. And here's the proposed building drawn to scale. Runs north to south along the eastern property line, 140 square feet in total length, 25 feet in width, and 3,500 square feet. The open carport is 1,000 square feet, and the other 2,500 square feet is an enclosed metal structure at 100 feet in length, and it would be 122% of the primary house. This is a context aerial showing accessory structures of various sizes are common in the area. This is where the proposed accessory structure will be on the property. Staff recommends approval. The structure meets every setback, and the accessory buildings of comparable size are already established in the surrounding properties. The proposed enclosed structure is actually smaller than the primary home structure at 2,500 square feet, and the floodplain limits placement to the east of the property. And I stand for questions. Just one question. I'm looking at the auxiliary accessory sheds in the neighborhood. None seem quite as large as this one. I couldn't get any of the square footage on any of them, but the one here to the north, towards the middle of the screen there, is the largest one that I saw. Okay. Okay. Do you have anything else? Okay. At this time, I would ask that Mr. Williamson and Ms. Parsons come up, please. Lance Williamson, 2422, Gibsonia, Galloway Road, Lakeland, Florida, 33810. Is there anything you want to tell me? Why? Not really. There actually is another property that does have the same square footage of what I'm requesting, and it's actually just two houses away from me. It's actually a fish farm. Oh, okay. Now, maybe it's not necessarily a residential property, but there is a structure that is of the same square footage, maybe even larger, actually. Okay. And you're going to store what in this? It's just going to be mostly general storage. If you actually looked at the photos, there was a 40-foot connex and another existing shed that's already on the property. Okay. I would be removing all that, and everything that's in those would eventually go in that building, along with just general vehicle. I have a 37-foot RV that I want to park underneath it as well. Okay. I have no further questions of you, sir. Is there anyone either for or against this variance? Okay. I wrote a note to myself, but I guess that's not, no one's here. I have nothing further, sir, and I'm going to close the public hearing at this point in time and move on to the next case. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Is everyone here for the Duke Energy? Okay. Okay. I was just, you've been patiently sitting, and I thought, oh, my goodness, they're in the wrong room or whatever. Okay. Thank you. Our next case is LDL VAR 2026-48. We call it the FDR Power Substation Expansion, FDR standing for Florida Development Road. Rebecca Hammock of Pape Dawson Engineers on behalf of Duke Energy requests an electric power substation, a residential setback reduction from the 100 feet required in Chapter 3 of the Land Development Code to 50 feet, and relief from the height restriction of 50 feet for the RH District for four 70-foot-tall lightning mass. This is part of the expansion of the electrical power substation in the residential high district. The property is located at 1800 Florida Development Road, east of Balsam Drive, south of Tallowwood Lane, east of U.S. 27, and south of Ridgewood Lakes Boulevard, north of Haines City in Section 29, Township 26, Range 27. On September 9th, 78 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on September 9th, and a legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on September 9th. We've received one email in opposition, and I am the presenter. The power substations in the code ever since 2000s, yes, 2000, September of 2000, when the adoption of the LDC placed a 100-foot setback on all the apparatus within the power substations from residential properties. This site is in a fast-growing area of the county, the northeast. It is near the cities of Haines City and Davenport in the ever-growing northeast where the land uses are fairly intense. The property sits on a residential high district that allows up to 20 units per acre. It is abutting, or across the street from it, is a residential low four. That is four units to the acre. This is the site. This is a 2026 aerial photo. You see immediately to the west and north are townhomes. We have large acreage lots to the east, and there is a retention area and open space and a subdivision to the south. This is the power substation as it sits today. There is a power line easement and unopened, unmaintained right-of-way that separates this substation on the east side from residences. There is an open space tract that stands in between the back lot lines of the townhomes and the property line of the power station. When the development was put in there, a landscape buffer, I believe it's a type C landscape buffer, was planted by the development. The buffer requirements are upon the last one in, typically. This substation has been here prior to the Land Development Code. It was established in 1988. This is approximately what the expansion will look like on the site. This is the primary area of expansion, though they were asking for relief on all four sides because there's other types of equipment that might be necessary. There will still be 50 feet between the substation and the property line that has an opaque fence that, once again, was put up by the neighboring development. There is at least 60 feet between the fence and the townhome, the residential structures. There will be, we mentioned these, four 70-foot-tall lightning masts will be placed in these locations. This is a blow-up of the site. The area around here shows you what's changing on the site, as outlined here. This is a recent ground photo. This is on the southwest corner of the property. This is the area in which, the estimated area in which the expansion will extend to. There will still be 50 feet of distance between the fence line and the expansion. This is looking at it from the open space tract on the opposite side of the street of Florida Development Road. This is their type A landscape buffer that the development was required to put in. This is looking at the rear or the north side of the site. And you see the distance, the fence, and the landscaping that's growing in the back. This is looking from the residences to the north of the site, looking south. This is looking from that open space area between the residences on the east side and the vegetative buffer that was put in by the developer. This is looking directly from the backyard of those townhomes on the west side, looking into the station. This is a close-up of the power station. There's currently three rows of these transformers. This will add another row of them to the site. We spent a lot of time, and in my career, I've spent a lot of time at power substations. This one didn't have any real audible noise or hum. The only part that made discernible noise from the outside of their fence line were these cooling fans on the transformers. And when you were on the other side of the fence line, those fans were not discernible. You could only hear the air conditioning units of the townhomes at about the same level of noise. This is looking back at when you come to the other side, you don't hear the fans from this side. The air conditioners drown out the noise at that point. Very similar noise level. This is the area in 2002 when the permit to expand this. The previous owner, Florida Power, I believe, had a permit to expand the site back in actually before the Land Development Code was adopted. The permit was still valid up until 2002. It expired because the project wasn't needed at the time. Also, the corporation changed hands from Florida Power to Progress Energy and then to Duke later on in 2012. This is how it looks today. So you see there's a big difference in how the power company had envisioned this site being used at one time and the things that it might influence versus today all of the development. And it is that development that you see around it is why this substation expansion is needed. With more homes, more people comes more need for power. This is their direct connection to a, I believe it's a 100 kV line that goes along that power line easement and an open, unmaintained right-of-way that I mentioned earlier. These are, in the staff report, I looked for examples of where there was less than 100 feet of separation. When the Land Development Code was crafted, we did an analysis of most of the substations. Most power substations are located in more commercial areas and usually have a lot more other non-residential uses around them or vacant land. There are two in the county where the substation is actually within the 100-foot separation. One is on Ronald Reagan Boulevard at the corner of Loma del Sol and Ronald Reagan. This development came in after the substation was established. The other one is in the downtown Lakeland. This substation here is much closer to residences. The street actually went through at one time before this substation was established. The homes in this area date back to the early 1900s, so the substation came in after and was expanded. Lakeland does not have the same standards for separation from substations as we do. Staff recommends approval. We feel that special conditions and circumstances exist. Because of the extra space between the townhomes and the property line, this reduction in buffers still accomplishes at least 100 feet of separation between the power substation and the nearest homes. One of the reasons for the need to expand is the added development that's come in in the northeast area. Power stations are very unique. This necessarily won't confer a special privilege on this power company as the city of Lakeland Electric has or other ones. So we don't see that it grants a special privilege. It is a unique situation in which this substation originally was in an isolated area surrounded by orange groves. Now it's surrounded by houses. Denial of the variance is not just, will it not just constitute a hardship on Duke Energy, but on the users in the area because this power substation serves them. If this site cannot be expanded, it will either result in having to find new sites, which will drive up power bills, or will result in diminished power levels and things of that nature. And I'm sure Duke Energy, as well as the residents, would want to avoid that. So with that, staff concludes. We've submitted our staff report and other documents, application for the record. And I will stand for questions. And perhaps you're not going to know this. Did the Duke Energy Florida have any meetings with the surrounding homeowners to discuss this previously? I'm not aware, but Duke Energy is here, and they have a presentation to speak on their behalf, and they can answer that question. Okay. Thank you. Everyone's going to get as much time as they need. There's no hurry in any presentation. That's why, fortunately, this was at the end. We have plenty of time, and everyone will get as much time as they need. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, for the record. Rebecca Hammock. I'm with Pape Dawson, representing Duke Energy. My address is 2602 East Livingston Street, Orlando, Florida, 32803. I am here with the engineer for the project, as well as representatives from Duke Energy, in case you have any technical questions related to scope of the expansion or operations themselves. Regarding your question, there was not a meeting, but the Public Engagement Division of Duke Energy did send out public notices advising them of the variance requests. Okay. Okay. So staff did an excellent job describing the variance requests, but I do have a brief presentation just to reiterate some things and also address some of the issues that were in the letter of opposition. Okay. Thank you. So, as Eric stated, we are requesting a structure setback variance for the equipment at the substation, and the variance request is from 100 feet from residential property line to 50 feet. We are also asking for height variances from 50 feet to 70 feet for the lightning mass. There will be four lightning mass that are added to the property. And, of course, that is for the safety of the surrounding area and for the substation itself. So, again, as Eric explained, we are proposing, or Duke is proposing, an expansion to the north and the west. There won't be any expansion to the south or to the east. They are adding an additional transformer to the site as well as the lightning mass. And, as Eric also explained during his presentation, there is some history here. The original property was purchased by the power company in 1987, and then there was a building permit in 1988. And at that time, the setbacks were established as 25 feet for front, 15 for side, and rear for 40. And, of course, when the county adopted its new ordinance in 2000, those setbacks changed. And, as you can see from the 2002 expansion permit that was also explained by Eric, those original setbacks were applied to the permit at that time. So, here is a picture of the existing conditions. And, as staff explained, there is an existing privacy fence that was put in by the developer of the townhomes. So, there is the existing privacy fence along the property line as well as landscaping in the 35-foot open space track, which helps to buffer the townhomes from the substation. Again, this is a picture that Eric shared that shows the privacy fencing and the landscaping. And, our understanding in speaking with staff is when, if this project receives variance approval and moves forward through the development process, when it goes through level 2 engineering review, a utility buffer will be applied and required along the frontage of the property. So, there will be a buffer at the front along Florida Development Road. And so, that buffer would require understory trees and hedges. No canopy trees would be required as they would interfere with the power lines. So, just to address a couple of items that were brought up in the letter of opposition, we did want to talk about lighting. So, the lighting at the substations are primarily for security, equipment, inspection, and maintenance. The site lighting will comply with county code. So, when it does come, if it is approved for the variances and does move forward through the process, then it would meet the lighting standards, which don't allow any more than 0.5-foot candles at the property line. The lights will be downward directed at a 30-degree angle and will be aimed into the substation and not to the external properties. And, regarding noise, we just wanted to let the hearing officer know and the public know that the operational noise is typically limited to the cooling fans for the transformers and that the decibel level at the property line is no more than 54 decibels, which, in comparison, is about the same decibel level as a household refrigerator. So, as staff went through the variance criteria, we are in agreement that the request does meet the variance criteria put forth in Section 931 of the Polk County Code, that there are special conditions that exist. The property or the substation was there prior to all of the major development that occurred. And Duke, unfortunately, does not have the ability to expand outside its property. It doesn't have the ability to acquire additional property to expand. So, the variances are needed in that location. Also, because of all the additional development in the area, the additional power is needed and is the impetus for the expansion. The conditions, as I stated, aren't the result of the applicant. The development trend in the area is the cause for the needed power. It would not create any special privilege, as there are other substations in the county with lesser setbacks. It would cause a hardship if Duke is not able to be granted the variances, because they would not be able to expand on this site. And we are requesting the minimum variances necessary to accommodate the expansion. And we believe it is in harmony with the code and the public welfare, as there are existing open space tracks and buffers on the adjacent residential neighborhood. Duke will be required to put in a utility buffer along the frontage. And, in addition, with the expansion, it will ensure reliable power to the area. So, we concur with staff's and DRC's finding of consistency and recommendation of approval. We believe our analysis that was submitted in support of the variance demonstrates consistency with Section 931 of the Polk County Land Development Code. And we respectfully request approval of the variances for setbacks from 100 feet to 50 feet and height variances from 50 feet to 70 feet for the lightening mass to accommodate the substation expansion. And that concludes my presentation, but I'm happy to answer any questions. And we also have representatives from Duke to answer any questions you might have. Just a couple questions for me. You said you had no other ability to expand this property. You could, in fact, condemn more property in the same area, couldn't you, through eminent domain? So, my statement was that they have no ownership of the adjacent property, so there's no ability to expand outside of the current limits. I couldn't speak to the eminent domain question. I would defer that to Duke. And if you could just, or maybe an engineer, just tell me, what is the difference? Why are you asking to go above 50 feet as far as safety concerns and why that's needed to go from 50 to 70? For the lightening mass? Okay. I believe Todd can answer that question. Thank you. Thank you. So, my full name is Grayson Todd Deason. My address is 614 Renaissance Point, Apartment 201, in Altamont Springs, Florida, 32714. For the lighting mass, the Duke lighting mass is 70 feet tall, and that's meant to get to a certain height to catch any lighting in the area. Wouldn't a 50-foot-high lighting mass work as well, or no? It's possible. You would have to install more of them if you were to do that, though, and we'd have to do the analysis. But Duke typically installs 70-foot tall. That's kind of what they do across almost every one of their substations. This is a pretty standard lighting mass they like to install. They have readily available. Versus if we had to go to a different lighting mass, that becomes a custom order. Okay. I have nothing further. Do you have anything else you'd like to tell me about this site? No. Okay. Awesome. Thank you. And I'll just add that, as Todd was saying, that if we have the shorter lighting mass, then that requires more lighting mass, and that's more visual clutter and intrusion into the area. But how many more lighting mass would it involve? They would have to do the engineering analysis to determine. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much for coming. All right. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Thank you for your consideration. Everyone who wants to speak, if you want to, just start coming on up and telling me name and address, and we'll go from there. Mi nombre es Héctor Santos. Un momento. Could we have the translator sworn in? Did you get sworn in before? I did. My name is Juana Bustos. And do you faithfully? Héctor Santos. Do you swear to affirm that what you truly and correctly translate English into Spanish and Spanish into English today? I do. Thank you. Su nombre, por favor. Héctor Santos. Héctor Santos is my name. Ajá. Su dirección. Tengo una propiedad en... Su dirección. Mi dirección. Ajá. De donde yo vivo. Sí. 30-08. 30-08. Parkway Boulevard. Parkway Boulevard. Apartamento 102, Kisimi. Apartment 102. Kisimi. In Kisimi, Florida. Tengo una propiedad en la Florida Development Road. So then, I have a property on Development Road. Uh-huh. Y es colinda con la estación de energía eléctrica. And it's next to the Duke Energy Plant. Estoy bien próximo a la estación de energía eléctrica. Estoy... I'm right next to it. Hay una servidumbre de paso. Y ya la construcción cambiaron todos los postes donde yo estoy sin mi consentimiento. Um, so they have, uh, placed, uh, power poles right into my property and they have not informed me about this? Sí. Y hay postes que están dentro de la coindancia. And so the poles, the light poles are right inside my property? Uh-huh. Este... Los puntos de la propiedad los desaparecieron por el tránsito de los camiones. Okay. So I had, uh, these sets of my property lines and they have been taken out of place, um, where am I consent? Well, if we could stop for un momento. Um, Mr. Peterson, could you show me where his house is and... Okay. Right here. Um... Thank you. Just for your information, the parcel, um, he provided is next door. I have the parcel number? Yes, right next to it. And if I could ask him, is his concern about the expansion or is his concern about an existing, um, structure that's already on the site? ¿Usted tiene preocupado por lo que están haciendo de extensión o está preocupado por lo que está existentemente en la propiedad de ustedes que están haciendo? Es por las dos cosas. I'm actually for both. He's actually, I'm actually for both. Okay. Mm-hmm. Okay. Um, keep going. Um, she, she's asking, she's the... Okay, please, please come, please come up, please. Anything you can furnish the court would help. And thank you for coming. Hi. My name is Marilyn Santos. I'm his daughter. Okay. Um, we are concerned because when Duke Energy work, before to put, uh, poles and everything, uh, they don't notify us to us and they make out a lot of mess in my dad land. They park all the machines, the trucks, everything right there. We have papers. We try to communicate with Duke Energy for fix that land and because they put some poles and block the entrance with the tensors and, uh, that's what they're concerned right now because they got to do the expansion to the other side. But the trucks, the equipment and everything, they park in my dad land. Okay. Um, could you give us a copy of the papers you've sent to Duke and we'll make copies of them and, um, we'll give you them back. But, but since they've been brought up in the course of this hearing, um, and I also will, we'll make a couple copies for Duke also so they have a copy of what we're dealing with, um, and everyone's informed. Let me share because I don't know. Okay. I know we spoke with, uh, Brian Engineering. Her last name, it was Brian. And, uh, I guess it's... Just know that we will make copies and give you everything back. Thank you. Okay. Do you have specific concerns about the expansion? What the Duke representative, uh, just told us and what is in the staff appraisal? Si usted tiene alguna preocupación de la expansión que hablaron ahora mismo en la área. Oh, sí, porque no sé qué cantidad me afecte por la cantidad de pies que hay de muy cerca a la estación. Okay. So, yes, the only thing I'm concerned is about the square footage as near to my property. Y yo voy a construir una casa. Okay. So, um, the reason I'm concerned is because I am, um, planning to construct or build my property in the future. So, she's saying that they're just parking the prop, uh, on their property, everything, trucks and... Tiene que señal donde que están parqueando. Are you see the picture? At that picture, the right part... We need the, we need you closer to the microphone, please. If you see the picture, the, uh, that side, that side, that part, or by that land. Okay. They came, they cut off trees without consent, we don't know nothing. They just come in, cut it off, everything, start putting that, uh, parts and part the trucks, machines, equipment, everything. Right now, we have a mess for construction, the new home in the future. We have to put the land again back, and we have to pay for that. When the Duke Energy did that. Okay. And that's why I'm concerned right now, because I know the extension is on the other side. Oh, great. But the equipment they gotta use, they gotta start parking again, and using my dad's land. So, just so I'm clear on this, you're, you're telling me that, and the, um, the Polk County, uh, land planning division, that Duke Energy is parking on your father's land. Exactly. And has been. And I'm concerned, they gotta start cutting off more trees, because they need more space for the equipment. They, did they cut any of your trees? Right now, no. Okay. In the other, when they put the poles, yes, without concern. Okay. When you say in the other, when did this happen? It's... When they cut the poles. Oh, en el mismo tiempo que instalaron los postes, pero no tengo fecha. We don't remember, it's like eight months, I don't remember. He's saying this, this happened just when they, um, installed the light poles in the property, right on his property area, and they cut the trees. Did you contact Polk County or any, uh, governmental agency about this? Si, si, si, si, con la señora Brian. We, we, we fought with somebody in the county, and they sent us to speak with Duke Energy, with the personal engineering, so the Duke Energy. That's what we did after, uh, whole county tell us is Duke Energy Project. Okay. And the, the last engineering we taught about it, it was, uh, engineering Brian. Does... Ella visitó el terreno. She went to the land, and she saw the land, and she said, they're supposed to, don't do that in that way, and, and they're supposed to fix that, or make an agreement with my dad, what we can do. But now, we call and came back, and she don't have the case no more. Do you have a, um, do you have any documentation as to the parameters of your property? Well, we have... Survey or... Not, not that you have to produce now, but just... Oh, okay. Do you have an appraisal with the... Oh, they have a survey. That's what she said. They have, uh, okay. Okay, could we get a copy of that, and could we also get copies for the representative from Duke? So, um, he's saying that they have... This one is an old one. She's looking for another one. But, um, he also stating that, um, the, the sticks with the property lines were whenever they, Duke started coming in, they took all of them out. So, there's no marking on it now. Thank you very much, Mr. Rogas. I'm so sorry. It's okay. We're, we're here to find out what's going on and to make an informed decision. So, that's what we need to do. Mr. Peterson, have you been made aware of any of this previously? It's very difficult to see where the property line is. There is a 30-foot, uh, right-of-way in between, uh, the Duke, uh, Energy Station and the, uh, uh, their property line. There's also, uh, utility easement. Okay, can you show on the map where that, I think I know where it is, but I don't want to guess. This is, the right-of-way lines are along here. See that, that area. Okay. And that's the right-of-way line for the Duke property? There's a, there's a 30-foot right-of-way, and then the Duke property begins on the other edge. So, there's 30 feet between here and there. Okay. But, it's an aerial photo, and... Um, Eric, I'm sorry. Can you show it again? Because I just want to make sure, what are you referring to, the 30 feet? The, the Duke property line is approximately here. There, there's a 30-foot right-of-way, and you can see where this was graded, uh, I believe there's some boards that are put down for, uh, to support, uh, equipment dealing with the power line. This is in a 2025 aerial photo. I believe it's in the fall. 2025. Do we have any other photographs from ground level? Uh, yes, I, I did take some. Okay. So, um... It's okay. Could we, could you, um, kind of conclude their testimony, and if they, whatever else you want to tell me, please do. So, again, um, the property lines, um, markings were inside, um, where he stated that, um, that it's part of the 30 feet right-of-way. And that's why they are, you know, concerned that they were taken off, and that was their property's markings. Okay. And you've furnished Mr. Rogas with the survey. Utele de la, uh, servicio de las marcas de la propria. Yeah, yeah, that's the survey. Okay. Current one. I don't have any, uh, photos from that side of the property because the expansion is not on that side. I know. Uh, we, yeah, I mainly focused my photos on the, uh, west side. It's okay. Okay. Are you, are you finished? Is it? Is it? Is it all what you have to say? Is it all what you have to say? Is it all what you have to say? Well, what you have to say? Okay. Okay. So, I just want to know what to do. Should I wait, or what about it? Um, I will make a decision within seven to ten days, and the representative from the county, Mr. Peterson, or his, one of his associates will furnish you with, um, that order. I, what, what gets transcribed is an order from me that I write, and it goes out to all the parties involved. So, if you want a copy of the order, please give us your, tell us you want a copy of the order. I assume you do. So, um, everyone else, please tell me, and we'll make sure you get it. Okay. Yeah, they want the copies. Okay. Thank you. So, just to make sure, all the information that I provided today, they had also, they were all my concerns. Okay. Thank you so much. Okay. Moving along, does the representative from Duke want to, okay, thank you. Hello, good afternoon. Tara Pickens, 299 First Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida. I am here representing Duke Energy, um, stakeholder engagement, which is the, um, portion of our company that has actually been working with this customer here on this specific incident. Okay. Um, and then I have Tabby Jackson here, who is our PM on the, that particular project that is outside of the variance request. Closer to the microphone. Thank you. And, um, she's actually had a lot of interactions with this customer. So, we just kind of wanted to lay out that we do have an existing easement for the poll that is in question. And then that area, as was discussed, is part of our 30-foot maintenance easement and allows us ingress and egress to our facilities. Um, there were some restoration claims that Tevi and the rest of the team have tried to work through, and she's going to go ahead and elaborate on those. Thank you. Sorry for being in here. Thank you. Uh, Tevi Jackson, 13257 Strode Lane, Windermere, Florida, 34786. So, I do have some context regarding, um, our, our neighbors, uh, their claims and complaints as I was the project manager for the 69 KV line rebuild, which was Davenport to West Davenport line. And to Tara's point, yes, correct. We do have a 30-foot easement, which we utilized to enter the White Heron Golf Club, uh, to conduct the work, which was the rebuild of the, uh, transmission line. Um, as a standard part of the restoration, Brooke Bryant, who was our contractor for stakeholder engagement, entered into communication with, I believe, Mr. Santos, and I believe yourself, ma'am. Um, I was not personally involved, so I don't want to... Please just keep talking. I apologize. Yeah. I, I just don't want to be rude either. Okay, I know. I apologize. It's okay. So, I can't personally say what was discussed. However, I was in email communication with Brooke asking, have you been in communication? Have we attempted to make restoration efforts? These sorts of things. We have a subcontractor elite that came and graded the grounds, spread seed in the areas that there were air, there were claims of damage. However, there was no ability to put sod there, as there was no irrigation in that area of impact. Um, as I understand, the, uh, there's concern about a pull that was placed within Duke Energy's easement. It's a distribution pull that was necessary for the line rebuilds. Um, however, as we are always trying to operate in good faith with our neighbors, you know, we attempted to, uh, communicate further. I think that maybe there was a breakdown in communication in which we are very happy to reopen communication. Tara Pickens is our stakeholder engagement manager. And it, it, it is not our intention, you know, to not be in good communication or, um, not be good neighbors. So, so we would like to resolve within reason, anything that we can do. And I would like to also mention that we are not expanding towards this neighbor. I know. I, I, I got that part. Sure. And I just wanted to reiterate that, you know, we are happy to, you know, discuss this further, um, as the manager of the stakeholder engagement group that supports our customers and the communities that we serve, I am happy to work with this customer and see if there's anything that we can do to resolve this issue. Um, and just thank you guys for your time. Okay. Is there anyone else on behalf of Duke or behalf of anyone else in the neighborhood? Anyone else who wants to speak? Um, again, Rebecca Hammack for the record, um, since we have Tara here, I didn't know if you wanted to address the public notification that you sent out at the beginning of the process, just to further answer your initial question. Yes. We did send mailers out to the impacted, um, property owners that would be impacted by this variance, visually, aesthetically, et cetera. And this is the only communication that we have heard against the variance or anything regarding this project, actually. How many mailers did you send out approximately? 78, I think. I'd have to look. Okay. And within what distance from? Everybody with the, sorry. That's okay. Everybody that was visually impacted. So basically, I think it was a hundred foot buffer around the area. Okay. Any other information that you would like me to have? I just would like to reiterate that, um, due to population growth, that is the need for this. And as Duke Energy, we are obligated to provide safe and reliable power to our customers. And that's the need for this project. It's to benefit them. I got that. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, seeing no one else who wants to speak about this, I'm going to close the public hearing. Mr. Peterson, is there anything else you want to say? No, ma'am. I've covered it. Okay. Well, let's come on up and, yes. Concern about the 30 feet they say they have. Closer to the mic, please. Okay. Thank you. I'm concerned about the 30 feet they say they have to my dad's property. When my dad bought the property, we have some sticks mark the length, sides. They took everything off. Okay. My concern, his concern, is we pay for the land. We already have the sticks mark what we pay. And when they put those lights in the floor, they took all the points out all over. Okay. Is it your testimony, if I'm interpreting this correctly, that Duke Energy took your father, part of your father's land? Yeah, I'm still concerned with that, because if we, when we bought the land, have the sticks with the pink ribbon all across the land, and when they start working in there, they took this off. Why? That's not their concern. We pay for the land. And they say now it's 30 feet to them. We pay this point to this point. Okay. Mr. Peterson, could you clarify the easement? I think there's a misunderstanding between the fee simple property line and the utility easement that exists on the property. And I don't think she's understanding that, yes, the property line is there, but there's an additional easement over their property for utilities. When was the easement created? I'd have to go to, it'll take me a little while. It's okay. It's okay. That's in the clerk's. I, I, when, okay, when did your, ma'am, when did they purchase the property? About 2015. 2015. Okay. More or less. I'm not sure, but about 2015. Okay. And how, if you can just briefly give me an idea, because I think that's what's driving a lot of this. This is in the Florida Development Company tract. It's a very large plat, and it was established. I'm sorry to have to have you shoot this. Yes. The plat was established in 1918. So. Very funny. Very, yeah. It's going, going back a while. So. Okay. The, the electrical easement. What I'm concerned about is when. There, yeah, there's an additional, in addition to the right of way, there's also a, a separate, uh, utility easement. Utility easement. And, and it would take me a while to find that. Okay. In the, because the easement's recorded separately from the plat. Okay. Okay. What, what I would ask at this point is that Duke Energy set up a meeting with this family, please, and have a Spanish interpreter there. I know it's an imposition. However, I believe that it would go a long way into making everyone at peace, um, out there. And I think the only, I think one of the issues, the only issue that the court sees at this point is that they don't understand or no one understands exactly when this utility easement was in place and if they bought their property subject to the utility easement. I think that's creating a lot of the problems. Um, at this point, if there's, if there's anyone else who wants to speak, please do come up and do so at this time. Um, so, um, again, just to clarify, the only owner wants in the property and their concern was that they understood that where the poles, if you can see them, they said that after the pole to their property is where they, um, have additional space in that white area. And that's where they also park in all the vehicles and equipment, which is inside their property. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. And if we could finish with, with Duke. There's over a thousand Florida power company easements to go through. So I, I don't think I can, I know, I know. Thank you again for the record, Rebecca hammock. Um, just in conclusion, and I, I know that you are aware that, um, that is a separate issue from the variance requests. And of course the variances are for this property within the boundaries of this property and that particular issue. Duke has agreed and will, has given them their card. Tara has given them their own card so they can be a direct contact to resolve that issue separately. I, I, I am aware of that. I just want to, want to keep up good neighborhood. Absolutely. And we appreciate relations and, and, and often in these public hearings, uh, other issues come to light, but we just wanted to reassure you that Duke will address that. Thank you. Thank you so much. With, with that, uh, last statement, I'm going to close the hearing and, uh, close the hearing date or meeting for today. And, uh, I will see you in a month or so. Thank you very much. Thank you, Duke for, for coming in and bringing expertise in. Thank you.