Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-10-06 Mintues P&Z MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2006 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Golden called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Following a moment of silent meditation and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, a quorum was declared present. PRESENT: Chairman Golden, Vice-Chairman McKey, Members Campbell, Conkling, Keller, Morris, Rhodus, Sills, and West. Also present were City Attorney Storey, Community Development Director Wagner, Principal Planner James, Planning Manager Armstrong, and Records Specialist Sibbitt. ABSENT: None CONSENT AGENDA Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting held on Tuesday, November 8,2005. Member Keller, seconded bv Vice-Chair McKev, moved to acceot the Consent Aaenda as oresented. Motion carried unanimouslv. NEW BUSINESS LAKEWOOD ESTATES - ANNEXATION Principal Planner James presented the Staff Report for the Annexation of Lakewood Estates PUD. The Lakewood Estates is located West of the Intersection of Wurst Road and Lakewood Avenue/Clarcona-Ocoee Road. The property is comprised of 15.8 acres and is designated Low Density Residential on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the Orange County-Ocoee Joint Planning Area (JPA). Property is being annexed based on the fact that it is contiguous with the northwest corner of the property touching the southeast corner of the Chevron property. The property currently has a one-single-family residential structure with six sheds that will be removed. An Annexation Feasibility Report has been done, which is consistent with State regulations. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION On December 19, 2005, the DRC met to determine if the proposed annexation was consistent with the City's regulations and policies. Based on analysis and subsequent discussions, the DRC recommended approval of the annexation of Lakewood Estates. Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis and the subsequent DRC recommendations, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend approval of the annexation of the 15.8-acre affordable housing subdivision known as Lakewood Estates. The Public Hearing was opened PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS Vice Chair McKey stated he went into the Orange County Property Appraisers website and saw that the property had sold for $550,000.00+ and wondered why that number was not in their report just as general information. Principal Planner James stated they usually go with the Appraised Taxable Value or the Just Value as opposed to the Sale Price. Chairman Golden asked if any member of the Public was in opposition of the Annexation. There was no response. The Public Hearing was closed Vice Chair McKev. seconded bv Member Milton. moved to recommend approval of the annexation as staff presented it. Motion carried 9-0. The Public Hearing was opened for Rezoning LAKEWOOD ESTATES - PUD LAND USE/PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN Planning Manager Armstrong presented the staff report for PUD Land Use Rezoning for Lakewood Estates. Lakewood Avenue runs north and south on the property with Wurst Road currently dead-ending at Lakewood. There will be a temporary cul-de-sac at the end of the road; however, sometime in the future Wurst Road is planned to be extended westward from the subject property to eventually connect with Ocoee-Apopka Road. There will also be a north-south internal road that is going to connect to the property to the south whenever that southern property does develop, but for now it will dead end with a cul-de-sac to the northeast of the property. The proposal is to develop fifty-four (54) residential single-family lots. Lakewood Estates is working with Orange County Homes in Partnership to develop an affordable housing community and they have requested that the property be rezoned to PUD. They are asking for standards that are similar to the R-1 zoning with some of the lot width less than 70 feet in width. Planning Manager Armstrong presented the Preliminary Subdivision Plan for Lakewood Estates. Lakewood Estates will have a master retention pond on the northwest corner of the property. A lift station, as well as a recreational tract with 2 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 a gazebo, will be located on the north side of Wurst Road. Since Wurst Road is to be extended through the property, Staff was concerned about providing off-road parking, specifically for the single-family home that will front onto Wurst Road, so a deeper front set-back will be imposed to allow for additional parking within the driveway. Lots 38-49 will have a 6-foot tall PVC fence to allow for screening on the rear of the lots. Water and sewer will be provided by the City of Ocoee. The developer is dedicating a 10-foot additional right-of -way along Lakewood Avenue for future roadway improvements. When the subdivision is completed, the intersection of Lakewood Avenue and Wurst Road will be improved to a 4-way stop. Future conditions of the intersection may include a possible signalization and turn lane improvements. The applicant is providing for an eastbound left turn lane from Wurst Road onto Lakewood Avenue, which will be 220 feet for deceleration and storage. The applicant is also asking for a waiver for the side setbacks of lots 12,13,37,38,46, and 49 to be reduced from 25 feet to 15 feet. The reason for this request is to allow for the north-south connection and to allow for the landscape and the wall. A development agreement is accompanying the PUD Land Use Plan for approval and execution by City Commission. The agreement is allowing road impact fee credits to be issued to the applicant in the amount of $214,304.20 for the Wurst Road extension and turn lane improvements on Wurst Road. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Development Review Committee (DRC) met on December 19, 2005, and reviewed the PUD Land Use Plan and the Preliminary Subdivision Plan. Staff discussed with the applicant two outstanding issues. The first, from the City Attorney was regarding adding a Condition of Approval to Sheet C2 as follows: "All stormwater from Wurst Road and any other internal public roads will drain into Tract A at no cost to the City of Ocoee. An easement to that effect will be provided on that plat." The second, from the Engineering Department, was regarding a jumper from potable to reclaim water will be needed. It was determined this could be shown on the plans during the Final Subdivision Plan process. The DRC voted unanimously to recommend approval of the PUD Land Use Plan, subject to City Commission approval of the Development Agreement. Additionally, the DRC voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plan, subject to the waiver and with additional conditions regarding COA being added to Sheet C2 and the developer amending the plans during the Final Subdivision Plan process to indicate a jumper from potable water to reclaim water. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 3 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 Based on the recommendation of the DRC, Staff respectfully recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of rezoning the property from Orange County "Citrus Rural" to PUD based upon approval of the Land Use Plan/Preliminary Subdivision Plan, as date stamped received by the City on December 20, 2005, subject to the City Commission approval of the Development Agreement and further subject to the waiver and the following additional conditions: 1. All stormwater from Wurst Road and any other internal public roads will drain into Tract A at no cost to the City of Ocoee. An easement to that effect will be provided on the plat. 2. Developer to add to the Final Subdivision plan, when submitted, a jumper from potable water to reclaim. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS Chairman Golden inquired if the turn lane was on Lakewood Avenue going into the subdivision. Planning Manager Armstrong stated the turn lane would be an eastbound turn lane from Wurst Road onto Lakewood Avenue. She further stated there was a discussion with the Public Works Director, and she believes the applicant is going to get with Orange County during the Final Subdivision Plan to look at any type of future road improvements that will need to be made to Lakewood Avenue. At this point there will be a four way stop at Lakewood Avenue. Vice Chair McKey asked if the waivers only applied to the lots on the corner. Planning Manager Armstrong said the applicants are asking to reduce the setbacks on the corner lots from 25 feet to 15 feet. Vice Chair McKey asked if the setback reduction was for all corner lots. Planning Manager Armstrong said it would be all corners except for lot 21, since the side of that lot is backing up onto Wurst Road. Vice Chair McKey said it appeared that the right-of-way decreases as it goes from Wurst Road across Lakewood Avenue and into the new Wurst Road section. Community Development Director Wagner said he believes Lakewood Avenue is 60 feet through the subdivision as a collector road. He further said one thing that was not mentioned is that the applicant is also dedicating 10 feet of additional right-of way along Lakewood Avenue. Vice Chair McKey said his concern is that Wurst Road is going to continue all the way through, making it part of the traffic pattern and no longer a collector road. Community Development Director Wagner said in the comprehensive plan a collector road carries generally a range of 12,000-15,000 trips a day. He further said Wurst Road is primarily for the 4 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 convenience of the residents to be able to go out to other collectors roads and onto major roadways. Member Milton inquired as to when Wurst Road would eventually tie into Ocoee- Apopka Road. Community Development Director Wagner said it would be determined when the property to the west is annexed and they have a development program, as of right now they do not know yet. Chairman Golden asked if they could put "No Parking" signs on Wurst Road. Community Development Director Wagner said since it is two moving lanes of traffic, they can put "No Parking" signs up along the roadway. Member Keller asked if there was a specific reason why they are not requiring some lots to have additional setbacks so that they may have some additional off- street parking as well. Planning Manager Armstrong said they worked with the applicant to provide as much off-street parking as they could allow with fitting a building envelope within the lots; however, they were constrained with the in lots in getting that extra depth for the setback. Community Development Director Wagner added that the lots Member Keller is referring to have a 30-foot setback, where a normal lot has a 25-foot setback. He further stated they could also add a parking space off to the side of the house. Member Conkling inquired if the additional side spot was going to be a requirement. Community Development Director Wagner said they would not normally require the side space but people do normally put them in. Member Conkling stated he feels there is going to be a parking nightmare once the cul-de-sac opens up and there is more through traffic. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, stated they do have the 30-feet; however, if they had to they would much rather reduce the rear setback and increase the front setback, but right now they are 5-10-feet larger than the normal front. He further stated he would have to talk to his client about the side parking. Community Development Director Wagner said lots 13-20 have some added depths, so without too much trouble they could probably increase those to a 40-foot setback. He further stated because lots 50-54 are backing up to the retention pond they could easily have those lots, if desirable to the builder, taken to a 20-foot setback. Community Development Director Wagner said the problem with adding a third parking spot to a 60-foot lot is that it starts looking like a lot of concrete. Member Morris inquired as to what the normal front setback is to a residential development. Community Development Director Wagner stated a normal front setback would be 25-feet. Member Morris then inquired as to why they are getting five more feet. Member Keller stated the reason they have a larger setback is that they do not have the extra parking on the road and in a normal development they normally have wider roads, where in this case they do not. Community Development Director Wagner said the easiest solution would be to 5 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 add a further setback to lots 13-20 and on the other side of the street take five feet from the rear. This could be looked at during the Final Subdivision Plan. Community Development Director Wagner said he recommends adding conditions or direction that they have the developer increase setbacks for those lots west of Street A. Member Rhodus said since the development will be a PUD and there will be a Homeowner's Association, what happens if the HOA does not allow for cars to be parked in the driveway but instead requires owner's to park inside their garage. Community Development Director Wagner stated that would be a covenant within the subdivision; the City does hot have any requirements that a resident has to park their car in the garage. Chairman Golden said by the picnic area it shows a wet pond that may have about 10-feet of water in it. He further stated he would like some kind of protection from young children running into the pond. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, stated part of the reason is because it is the code requirement and the idea is not to create a compound. The pond is designed; however, to have a general slope so that if someone were to fall in they could at least swim out to the slope. The design meets state requirements. Chairman Golden inquired as to why the picnic area was by the lift station. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, stated it was the only area they had open space. Chairman Golden said, on the pond issue, the City Attorney requested that Tract A accept any future run-off from the road. He further inquired if they felt that Tract A was large enough to accept any future run-off with the roads widening. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, stated like the Lake Apopka Rule they are designing it so that it is impervious. Chairman Golden said there are surface water areas, pond, and ditches dug on that site and is wondering how the developer plans to protect the homes from falling into a hole that was there before. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, said that based on the Environmental Report that was done in the past, that area had been classified as surface water; but if they do come across any kind of muck, they will de-muck the site. Chairman Golden said there is a ditch on the site and was wondering if it had a continuation or if it dead-ended on the property. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, stated the ditch does not collect any off-site run-off, but it will retain the rainwater collected, meeting the St. John's Code, Ocoee City Code, and Orange County Code, it will then be discharged off-site to the northwest as it has been done in the past. Chairman Golden said the property is marked as wetlands and inquired if they would have to mitigate the areas. John Kirby, Kirby 6 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 Engineering, said the surveyor had marked the property as wetlands; the Environmental Consultant had classified it as surface water, but when they obtain their permit from St. John's, they will find out what they think. If St. John's classifies it as wetlands there will have to be mitigation for which they will be fully prepared to do. Chairman Golden said the lots that they are asking for reduced setbacks on, would they consider showing shrubs or additional landscaping provided by the developer. He further said he would like to see further screening of those home lots. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, said the only lots that will be affected would be lots 12, 13 and 49, and that should not be an issue. Chairman Golden said he noticed only about ten trees on the survey and did not notice any trees marked. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, said any of the trees on the landscape plan with an "x" will be removed; if they do not have an "x" then those trees are staying. Julie Schrader, 450 South Orange Avenue, Orlando (on behalf of Chevron Property), said the Chevron property is to the northwest corner of the Lakewood Estates parcel. She further stated they are not there opposing the development or annexation, but they do have a concern they would like to see addressed as a condition of approval on the development. The Chevron property has been having a very bad problem with respect to flooding and drainage from adjacent properties. Chevron is concerned that with the Lakewood Estates property going from largely pervious surface to fifty-four (54) homes and a public road, which is a large amount of impervious surface, that there will be an impact with the pavement and drainage to their property. Julie Schrader further said what they would like to see, as a condition of approval is that the drainage pond on site be required to accept the drainage from the extension of the road or any expansion of the road. They would like to see the developer hold their drainage on site, not just from the roads but also from the home sites. Chairman Golden asked Ms. Schrader if they had reviewed the developers calculations. Julie Schrader stated they have not reviewed any construction level drawings or stormwater drainage; however, their hope was just to get a condition of approval at this level so that this could steer the details of the construction calculations. Edmond Harrison, 1350 Clarcona-Ocoee Road, stated the biggest water problem is coming from Vignetti Park. He briefly explained and showed the drainage problems on his property. Edmond Harrison also stated he would like the developers to put a wall up on the north side of the Lakewood Estates. He provided proof that since 1946 he has had a business on his property. Richard 7 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 Harrison (son of Edmond Harrison), 127 11th Avenue, said that for the record he would like the developers to know that his business allows his trucks to run at all hours of the morning or night as a 24-hour emergency service. Steve Marbais, 716 E. Lakeshore Road, said he owns a used car lot, which is located on the corner lot across from the Lakewood Estates property. His biggest concern is the turn lane and if the turn lane would take up the developers property and not encroach onto his property. He further said he does not have a lot of frontage on his property. His next concern is the appearance of the Lakewood Estates subdivision and if the developers were going to maintain a nice clean appearance with a brick wall. Nora Mask, 1120 N. Lakewood Avenue, said she owns the 15 acres south of the proposed Lakewood Estates. She stated for the last thirty years she has observed the proposed Lakewood Estates property and has seen the land get very soggy when it rains. She further stated she feels the land is excellent pastureland and is not a good piece of land for a housing development. Nora Mask said she has concerns with the following: 1) drainage affecting her property; she does not want her land to become any wetter than it is because it can affect her horses, 2) people in the new development wondering into her pasture and feeding her horses, and 3) a Bald Eagle who resides in a tree, which is right in the path of the proposed Wurst Road extension. She briefly explained her concerns regarding the Bald Eagle and its nest. Community Development Director Wagner said the Bald Eagle concern had been discussed in the review process and his recollection is that the Eagle projection zone was indicated to be crossing the northwest corner of the Lakewood Estates property and a permit from the Wildlife Agency would be pulled to do construction outside of the nesting season. He further stated if they find out that the nest is closer to the site or the protection zone is greater than what they think then that will affect the final engineering; however, it did not appear to them that the extension of the road would affect the nest. Jerry Mask, 1120 N. Lakewood Avenue, said his concern is regarding the pond that the developer is building in the back of the proposed development. He stated if the developer does not drain the pond in the direction of the Chevron property then the whole neighborhood would get flooded. He proposes that the developer sell the property to a rancher or farmer and buy land that will be a decent neighborhood elsewhere to ensure people a decent quality of life. Joe Margio, 140 N. Orlando Avenue, Winter Park (on behalf of Chevron Property), said there is obviously many concerns about drainage and in reviewing 8 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 the preliminary plans, there is an outfall structure proposed which will discharge onto the Chevron property. Chevron is opposed to having their property considered as legal positive outfall and if that is successfully argued then the applicant will have to contain all their stormwater on-site, which means their pond will have to be bigger. He further stated they have not looked at all the calculations and he feels Mr. Kirby would also agree they have not developed to that level yet. Vice Chair McKey asked Mr. Margio if the Chevron property drains towards Lake Apopka. Joe Margio stated it does and it has a ditch on the property, which does drain towards Lake Apopka. Vice Chair McKey further stated to Mr. Margio that because of that ditch there is an opportunity for them to drain excessive water off their property. John Kirby, Kirby Engineering, said he would be addressing all the issues. The first issue regarding the Chevron property, he said they are proposing to put a pond structure and put a treatment in with a continuation of being discharged and not creating any more water than there had been before. He further stated his ponds are designed to take care of discharge. Calculations have been done and are available to be looked at. Member West said the Lakewood Estates property falls under the Lake Apopka Rule, which means they have to have more retention on the Lakewood Estates property then on any other part of the County. Vice Chair McKey asked Mr. Kirby if their outfall was an emergency outfall. John Kirby stated their outfall retains a certain amount of water and then it outfalls, but he would not consider it an emergency outfall. Chairman Golden asked Mr. Kirby if they were planning to build up the property in total or just the house lots. He also asked if they planned to have swales at the rear of the lots to carry the water down to the northwest. John Kirby stated they would be building the house up and not flat on the ground. Chairman Golden further stated that if they were just building up the home lots and not the property, it would be difficult to keep the water off the neighboring property. John Kirby stated the roads would be raised somewhat and the home lots would be raised about 2-2 % feet. Chairman Golden asked if the 2-2 % feet would be the pad or the entire lot. John Kirby stated the actual pad as it gets away from the lot would blend right from the lot to the street. Chairman Golden asked Mr. Kirby if the swales would be down between the lots and at the rear of the lots to carry the water to the pond. John Kirby stated that was correct and everyone they discharge would go to the retention pond. 9 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10, 2006 John Kirby said regarding the property to the north and the drainage issue, he thinks they also drain towards the Chevron property. As far as the Vignetti Park area, he is not sure of the history. Member West stated he feels there are some drainage problems but he does not think it is the developer of the proposed Lakewood Estates problem. He further stated he feels there will be less water on the Chevron property with the subdivision there then they get right now. John Kirby further stated that on the issue regarding the brick wall, there would be a wall on Lakewood Avenue. He further stated the developer did not intend to put a wall on the north side because it will be extremely costly. Member West asked if it was possible to put a fence up along the north side. Member Sills stated if the roles were flipped and Mr. Harrison were to develop, they would probably require him to put up a wall regardless of the cost. Member Sills further stated it is not fair to the homeowners who will not be told prior to purchasing their homes in the Lakewood Estates subdivision, that trucks will be starting at all times of the day. Member Sills inquired if they could put some type of wall (either wood or masonry) or maybe a landscape buffer. John Kirby stated they could consider landscape since they will be landscaping the property. Chairman Golden said he would like to hear from the applicant, his take on the Bald Eagle issue. John Kirby stated the Bald Eagle nest only affects the property to the west and not their property. He further stated that due to the many hurricanes several laws have changed regarding the Bald Eagle zones. Donald Harrison, address unknown, stated if they build the home lot pad up 2 feet what will happen to the property on the sides. He further stated the land is already wet. Vice Chair McKey stated there would be swales that will direct the water to the retention. Richard Harrison asked how many houses were allowed per acre and with the changes if it was consistent with what was up and down Wurst Road already. Planning Manager Armstrong stated the zoning of the property is "Citrus Rural" and she believes it is one unit per five acres. She further stated the older lots on Wurst Road are 60 feet in width and are smaller lots, but there are a mixture of different size lots in that area. Richard Harrison asked when the plans were going to take place for a traffic signal at the intersection by the Lakewood Estates. Chairman Golden stated it would probably be a while before a traffic signal will be placed there. Planning Manager Armstrong stated that at this point, it would 10 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 be a four way stop sign but future conditions may warrant a traffic signal with turn lane improvements. Julie Schrader stated, regarding the drainage issue, they understand that the Chevron property is accepting drainage now; however, in its current stage the ditch on the applicant's property accepts drainage from multiple properties. She further stated what is happening is they are going to pave their entire piece of property and maintain that they will still be allowed to put the same amount of drainage onto the property that previously came from multiple properties. Julie Schrader said that the City Code provides for a 25-year storm, which is not sufficient and provides for equivalent rate not volume. The Lakewood Estates property could now discharge at one cubic foot per second for ten hours instead of one hour, which would result in Chevron getting more water. The City Code also provides that the City has the discretion to increase the requirement to prevent flooding and they are requesting that in a minimum they require to hold 125-year storm in consistent volumes. John Kirby stated he does not want to address anything further regarding the drainage onto Chevron, but will speak with them privately. He further said if there is any off-site property with drainage coming toward their property, they have to accept it or at least straddle it around their property and Chevron has the same responsibility. The Public Hearing was closed. DISCUSSION Vice Chair McKey said he feels the 25-year storm is obsolete and they should be looking into going to at least a 100-year storm as a standard. He further said with this particular situation he thinks they should look at the issue and see if they can increase the volume and put a fence at the angle of the slope without incurring too much expense to the owner's of the development. Member Conkling said under staff recommendation he did not see anything addressing that there was a Bald Eagle near the property. Community Development Director Wagner stated that as Mr. Kirby had mentioned they did inquire about it and the information they were given had said it did not affect the property. He further stated his recollection is that the protection zone may have affected where the retention pond is going to be located. He also stated a developer can build within the protection zone at certain times of the year, but in this instance it did not affect the property nor is the nest located on the property. At the final subdivision plan approval, the developer will need to provide a letter from the Fish and Wildlife Agency and provide the City with any conditions the Fish and Wildlife Agency imposes on the development. 11 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 Member Keller asked if the Planning and Zoning Commission could actually have this development go back to OCR instead of going forward since there are many issues such as the Bald Eagle, the neighbors trucking business, and drainage problems. He further stated he feels they should really have all these issues decided before they take a vote to move it forward. Member Campbell said he felt the same and that there are too many unanswered questions such as the drainage issue not being resolved and a wall needing to be placed along the northern boundary as noise barrier from the trucks. He further stated he feels there needs to be a little further planning. Member Morris said that regarding the Bald Eagle issue the developer will have to meet State guidelines and requirements. He further stated whatever is legal for their retention pond size and drainage they should do it and if they cannot Chevron can stop them. As far as the noise issue with the trucks, Member Morris feels the residents should have to put up their own fence if the noise is too much for them. Member Morris stated the developer went through DRC and staff without any issues and his experience with the developer is that they are a quality company, he has been involved with them through other developments through the County, and he would recommend approval. Member West said he agrees that there are issues; however, the Bald Eagle is not a big issue because the development of Westyn Bay and Forestbrooks were both permitted by the Fish and Wildlife Agency prior to development. He further stated that he agrees there is currently a drainage problem but he does not believe that it is being caused by the Lakewood Estates property. With the Lake Apopka Rule and the retention pond that the developer is proposing he feels the drainage will get better and further would recommend approval of the project. Member Sills said many people who buy affordable housing might not always be able to just up root and move. His concerns are for the citizens of Ocoee. Member Rhodus said she has been on the board of the Orange County Family Self Sufficiency Program for about six years and it was announced at a function that the Lakewood Estates development was coming to Ocoee. She further stated there was so much excitement for the development because there is a definite need for affordable housing and she would like to see families have it; however, she agrees with some of the concerns regarding muck due to excessive water. 12 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10, 2006 Vice Chair McKey inquired as to what an affordable housing would cost. Toby Best said the maximum cost would be $156,000, with the home having a minimum of approximately 1300 square feet. Member Keller said he is not against the development going up he is against them doing it right now because he feels it has not been thought through all the way with some of the issues that were brought up. He further stated he feels their responsibility is that when it goes to the City Commission their board had made the best efforts on making sure the property is at its best and he feels they have not done that. City Attorney Storey stated the options before the board are to either approve with or without conditions, or deny. If they deny it would still have to go before City Commission with those conditions of denial. Member Keller asked if they could move to have it go back before staff. City Attorney Storey said they could not have it go back before staff; however, the developer can voluntarily withdrawal or remand it back to DRC, but that is not one of the options for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Member West said they would never get anything to the City Commission if they depend on knowing every answer. He understands the concerns of Member Keller, but he feels it should be recommended to send this project onto the City Commission with their concerns being considered. Community Development Director Wagner stated their concerns are well founded and he feels the best they can do is address all their concerns as conditions to the City Commission; who will either approve them subject to those conditions or address them at final. He further stated there is another Public Hearing regarding this property before the City Commission where all their issues will be numerated again. Community Development Director Wagner said he would recommend they do what they have normally done in the past, which would be to list all their concerns and recommend approval subject to those conditions. Chairman Golden said he feels the drainage issues are valid but feels they are Orange County issues. He further stated even though projects are well engineered it does not mean they will not have drainage problems. He further stated what is before them are preliminary subdivision plans and what he sees is that the developer is looking to contain their water and are meeting the code. Chairman Golden further said he believes a preliminary study was done regarding the Bald Eagle and it was concluded that it would not impact the property and he is sure other studies will be done. He does, however believe a condition should be added for the northern boundary having a wall or some kind of sound barrier. Chairman Golden said there is a need for affordable housing in Ocoee and Orange County and he feels that this is a good location for it. 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10, 2006 Vice Chair McKey. seconded bv Member Keller, moved to approve rezonina of the Lakewood Estates propertv from Oranae County "Citrus Rural" to PUD. based upon approval of the Land Use Plan/Preliminarv Subdivision Plan. as date stamped received bv the Citvon December 20. 2005. subiect to the Citv Commission approval of the Development Aareement and further subiect to the waiver and the followina additional conditions: 1) All stormwater from Wurst Road and anv other internal public roads will drain into Tract A at no cost to the Citvof Ocoee. An easement to that effect will be provided on the plat. 2) Developer to add to the Final Subdivision plan. when submitted. a iumper from potable water to reclaim. 3) Staff look at re-evaluation of proposed retention pond to a hiaher capacitv of a 1 OO-vear level. 4) Developer increase the minimal front setback to at least 35 feet for lots 13-20 and 50-54. 5) Provide additionallandscapina for comer lots with the front setback of 15 feet. 6) Developer place a wall. fence. or additionallandscapina or other form of sound barrier a/ona the northern boundary of the property. for pUf/Jose of reducina the amount of noise from the neiahbors from the north. and 7) Developer to determine whether a permit is/is not reauired from the appropriate aovernmental aaencv as it relates to the Eaale and its nest. Motion carried unanimouslv. The Public Hearing was open for the Preliminary Subdivision Plan As no one wished to speak, the Public Hearing was closed for the Preliminary Subdivision Plan. (Same comments and conditions carried over) Vice Chair McKey. seconded bv Member Morris, moved to approve the Preliminarv Subdivision Plan for Lakewood Estates. based upon approval of the Land Use Plan/Preliminarv Subdivision Plan. as date stamped received bv the City on December 20. 2005. subiect to the Citv Commission approval of the Develooment Aqreement and further subiect to the waiver and the followinq additional conditions: 1) All stormwater from Wurst Road and anv other internal public roads will drain into Tract A at no cost to the Citv of Ocoee. An easement to that effect will be provided on the plat. 2) Developer to add to the Final Subdivision plan. when submitted. a iumper from potable water to reclaim. 3) Staff look at re-evaluation of proposed retention pond to a hiaher capacitv of a 100-vear level. 4) Developer increase the minimal front setback to at least 35 feet for lots 13-20 and 50-54. 5) Provide additionallandscapina for comer lots with the front setback of 15 feet. 6) Developer place a wall. fence. or additionallandscapina or other form of sound barrier a/ona the northern boundary of the propertv. for purpose of reducina the amount of noise from the neiahbors from the north. and 7) Developer to determine whether a permit is/is not reauired from the appropriate 14 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 10,2006 aovernmental aaencv as it relates to the Eaale and its nest. Motion carried unanimouslv. MISCELLANEOUS None ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:04 p.m. ~:L' JvtU Melanie Sibbltt, Records Specialist 15 APP